Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Miller v. Town Board of Sellersburg

Court of Appeals of Indiana

November 29, 2017

Michelle Miller, Town of Sellersburg Clerk-Treasurer, Appellant-Plaintiff,
v.
Town Board of Sellersburg, Indiana, Appellee-Defendant.

         Appeal from the Clark Circuit Court The Honorable Roger Duvall, Special Judge Trial Court Cause No. 10C01-1601-MI-12

          ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT Larry O. Wilder Jeffersonville, Indiana.

          ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE Jacob C. Elder Lanesville, Indiana.

          PYLE, JUDGE

         Statement of the Case

         [¶1] Town of Sellersburg Clerk-Treasurer, Michelle Miller ("Miller"), appeals the trial court's grant of summary judgment in favor of the Town Board of Sellersburg ("the Town Board") on Miller's mandate petition. Concluding that the Town Board is entitled to judgment as a matter of law, we affirm the trial court's grant of summary judgment in its favor.

         [¶2] We affirm.

         Issue

         Whether the trial court erred in granting the Town Board's summary judgment motion.

         Facts

         [¶3] On October 26, 2015, the Town Board unanimously approved Ordinance 2015-008 ("Ordinance 2015-008"), which included a budget that funded two deputy clerks in Miller's office. Two months later, at the last meeting of the year, the Town Council unanimously approved Ordinance 2015-012 ("Ordinance 2015-012"), which eliminated funding for one of Miller's deputy clerks.

         [¶4] In January 2016, Miller filed a petition for mandate, wherein she asked the trial court to reinstate the budget set forth in Ordinance 2015-008, which included funding for two deputy clerks in her office. Two months later, Miller filed a summary judgment motion, wherein she argued that she was entitled to judgment as a matter of law on her mandate petition because it was "not the [Town] Board's statutory function to mandate the number of employees needed by the Clerk-Treasurer to carry out the duties of the office." (Miller's Br. at 19). In support of her argument, Miller cited Indiana Code § 36-5-6-7, which provides, in part, that the "clerk-treasurer shall appoint the number of deputies and employees needed for the effective operation of the office . . . ." The Town Council filed a response in opposition to Miller's motion as well as a cross-motion for summary judgment wherein it pointed out that Indiana Code § 36-5-6-7 further provides that the clerk-treasurer's appointments are subject to "the approval of the town legislative body."

         [¶5] The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the Town ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.