Subscriber Benefit
As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe Now
The Indiana Court of Appeals will hold oral arguments July 22 for cases involving a Monroe County permitting dispute and a small claims lawsuit regarding a loan payoff statement.
In Monroe County Board of Zoning Appeals v. Bedford Recycling, Inc., 23A-MI-1729, Bedford Recycling, Inc. applied for a conditional use to build a scrap metal recycling facility near Bloomington.
According to the Court of Appeals, the Monroe County Board of Zoning Appeals approved the application but nearly a year later revoked the approval, explaining that it had made a mistake of law.
Bedford Recycling sought judicial review, and the Monroe Circuit Court vacated the revocation order and reinstated the initial approval.
The court concluded that the BZA’s revocation order was not based on a mistake of law but rather mistakes of fact or a change of reasoning, which cannot be the basis for revoking a zoning approval. The BZA now appeals.
The scheduled panelists are Judge Nancy Vaidik, Judge Cale Bradford, and Judge Dana Kenworthy, with the hearing beginning at 2 p.m.
Also, the appellate court will hear arguments at 10:30 a.m. for Union Savings Bank v. Mychael T. Spencer, 23A-PL-2734.
In July of 2021, Union Savings Bank sent a loan payoff statement to Mychael Spencer, which Spencer paid leading USB to release its note and mortgage associated with Spencer’s property.
In what USB referred to as an inadvertent error, the payoff statement that USB had sent to Spencer had not included $5,872.50 in payments that had previously been deferred due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
USB filed a small-claims action seeking to recover the funds. Spencer filed a counterclaim alleging that USB had engaged in deceptive practices and requested that the case be certified as a class action.
The Hancock Circuit Court granted Spencer’s request for class certification. The trial court subsequently denied USB’s motion to reconsider and certified the case for interlocutory appeal.
USB argues on appeal that the trial court abused its discretion in denying its motion to reconsider because the class members lacked standing to sue.
Spencer, on behalf of the class, argues that the trial court properly determined that they did have standing to sue. Both parties rely on the Indiana Supreme Court’s decision in Hoosier Contractors, LLC v. Gardner, 212 N.E.3d 1234 (Ind. 2023) in support of their respective positions.
The scheduled panelists are Judge Terry Crone, Judge Cale Bradford and Judge Elizabeth Tavitas.
Please enable JavaScript to view this content.