State ex rel. Katz v. Superior Court

308 N.E.2d 694, 261 Ind. 623, 1974 Ind. LEXIS 379
CourtIndiana Supreme Court
DecidedMarch 29, 1974
DocketNo. 174S2
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 308 N.E.2d 694 (State ex rel. Katz v. Superior Court) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Indiana Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
State ex rel. Katz v. Superior Court, 308 N.E.2d 694, 261 Ind. 623, 1974 Ind. LEXIS 379 (Ind. 1974).

Opinion

Hunter, J.

This is an original action wherein the relator prays for an alternative writ of mandate to issue as a result of the trial court’s ruling on a motion for change of venue. The sole question presented is whether the motion for change of venue was timely filed. The stipulated facts may be briefly stated:

(1) April 6,1973 — Plaintiff files his complaint.

(2) May 24, 1973 — Relator files his answer and a counterclaim.

(3) October 30, 1973 — Relator files amended counterclaim.

[624]*624(4) October 30,1973 — Relator files motion for leave to amend answer.

(5) November 1, 1973 — Respondent court grants order for leave to amend answer.

(6) November 6, 1973 — Relator files motion for change of venue pursuant to TR.76.

(7) November 21, 1973 — Respondent court overrules motion for change of venue.

The trial court correctly overruled relator’s motion for change of venue as the motion was not timely filed. State ex rel. Yockey v. The Superior Court of Marion County (February 15, 1974, Supreme Court No. 1173-S 222). In Yockey, supra, this Court held for purposes of TR. 76(2), the issues are “deemed first closed on the merits upon the filing of defendant’s answer. Filing of the answer shall initiate the ten (10) day time period within which the change of venue motion must be filed.” The holding Yoekey controls.the case at bar. Relator’s motion for change of venue was filed long after the ten (10) day time period expired. The trial court was correct in overruling the same. Therefore, the writ herein prayed for is denied.

Writ denied.

Arterburn, C.J.,'DeBruIer, Givan and Prentice, JJ., concur.

Note. — Reported in 308 N. E. 2d 694.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

In the Matter of Estate of Niemiec
435 N.E.2d 999 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1982)
In Re Marriage of Brown
387 N.E.2d 72 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1979)
State Ex Rel. Crane Rentals, Inc. v. Madison Superior Court
365 N.E.2d 1224 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1977)
Rayburn v. Eisen
336 N.E.2d 392 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1975)
State v. SUPERIOR COURT OF MARION COUNTY, ROOM NO. 3
308 N.E.2d 694 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1974)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
308 N.E.2d 694, 261 Ind. 623, 1974 Ind. LEXIS 379, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-katz-v-superior-court-ind-1974.