Subscriber Benefit
As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe Now
A group of Floyd County Republicans did not have standing to challenge the right of one of the county’s GOP council members to hold office, the Indiana Court of Appeals ruled Monday in upholding a lower court’s decision.
According to court records, Charles Moon, Connie Moon, Daniel Short, and Heather Peters brought the action in 2023 against Floyd County Councilwoman Denise Konkle, claiming she forfeited her office by residing in Harrison County for six months.
Attorneys for the four petitioners could not immediately be reached for comment.
Robert Eichenberger, a Dinsmore & Stohl LLP attorney based in Louisville, Kentucky, represented Konkle.
In an email to The Indiana Lawyer, Eichenberger said, “We are pleased with the decision of the Court of Appeals. It correctly concluded that the lawsuit was improper from the start and appropriately applied longstanding, straightforward Indiana law. The whole lawsuit was a political stunt, and the Court of Appeals correctly affirmed the dismissal.”
In November 2018, Konkle, a Republican, was elected to the Floyd County Council as the District Four councilwoman.
For more than 40 years, Konkle and her then-husband lived together in Floyd County. When the two divorced, Konkle purchased her own property in Floyd County with plans to build a new house.
The purchase agreement for the new property was finalized on Oct. 3, 2022. At the end of October, Konkle moved into her sister’s rental property in neighboring Harrison County while her new house was being built. That November, she was reelected to the county council after running unopposed.
On April 19, 2023, Charles Moon, who unsuccessfully ran as a Republican for a different county council seat in 2022, filed a “quo warranto” action to have Konkle’s office declared vacant, alleging that “Konkle has forfeited her right to be a member of the County Council of Floyd County.”
Moon argued that “by continuously residing in Harrison County for at least six (6) months,” Konkle violated Article 6, Section 6 of the Indiana Constitution’s requirement that all county officers “reside within their respective counties.”
That same month, construction was completed on Konkle’s new house, and she moved in on April 28.
Konkle moved to dismiss the quo warranto action, arguing that Charles Moon lacked standing to bring such an action and that, alternatively, she did not forfeit her office because she maintained her Floyd County residency.
Moon subsequently moved to amend his petition to add as co-petitioners his wife Connie Moon, a Floyd County councilwoman; Floyd County Councilman Short, and Peters, who was the chair of the Floyd County Republican Party at the time.
In February 2024, the Floyd Circuit Court granted summary judgment to Konkle and denied the four co-petitioners’ motion for summary judgment.
The appellate court ruled the co-petitioners lacked standing to bring a quo warranto action because they do not have a “special interest” in Konkle’s office.
Judge Nancy Vaidik, writing for the court, noted that Charles Moon’s status as a Floyd County resident and taxpayer is not a “special interest” and that he does not reside in Konkle’s district.
Vaidik wrote that the co-petitioners did not identify any case law where a person in a similar position, either as a council member in another district or as a party chairperson, was found to have a special interest sufficient to bring a quo warranto action.
Finally, Vaidik pointed out Peters, while identified as a resident of Floyd County District 4, also doesn’t have standing because she did not make herself a candidate for Konkle’s office, and she doesn’t assert that she would apply for the office should a vacancy arise; she simply states that she is “a resident of the district who could fill the seat.”
Citing Brenner v. Powers, Vaidik wrote, “Like the plaintiffs in Brenner, Peters did not assert a specific right to Councilwoman Konkle’s office; by Relators’ own classification, Peters is merely a District Four resident who could be elected to or appointed to fill a vacancy in the office at a later time. Without an interest in the right or title to Councilwoman Konkle’s office, Peters lacked standing to bring a quo warranto action.”
The appellate court added that because the co-petitioners lacked standing to bring the action, the court would not address their residency arguments.
The case is Charles Moon, Connie Moon, Daniel Short and Heather Peters v. Denise Konkle, 24A-PL-1861.
This story has been updated.
Please enable JavaScript to view this content.