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.

City of New Albany v. Board of Commissioners of the County of Floyd

Court of Appeals of Indiana

May 22, 2019

City of New Albany, Appellant-Intervenor/Counterclaimant,
v.
Board of Commissioners of the County of Floyd, Appellee-Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant, New Albany Floyd County Indiana Building Authority, Appellee-Defendant/Cross-Claim Defendant.

          Appeal from the Floyd Superior Court The Honorable Vicki Carmichael, Special Judge Trial Court Cause No. 22D02-1804-MI-598

          Attorneys for Appellant Anne K. Ricchiuto Jane Dall Wilson Stephanie L. Boxell Faegre Baker Daniels LLP Indianapolis, Indiana

          Attorneys for Appellee board of commissioners of the county of floyd Richard Fox Kristi L. Fox Fox Law Offices New Albany, Indiana Bart A. Karwath Mark J. Crandley Barnes & Thornburg LLP Indianapolis, Indiana

          Bradford, Judge.

         Case Summary

         [¶1] Between 1991 and 1992 the New Albany Floyd County Indiana Building Authority ("the Building Authority") issued bonds in order to finance a Criminal Justice Center ("the Center"). In 1992, Floyd County ("the County"), through its Board of Commissioners, entered into a fifteen-year lease ("the 1992 Lease") with the Building Authority, in which the County would lease the Center and the City of New Albany ("the City") would sublease from the County. In 2018, approximately ten years after the 1992 Lease ended, the County demanded that the Building Authority deed over the title of the Center pursuant to a provision in the 1992 Lease. After the Building Authority refused, the County filed suit seeking declaratory judgment and specific performance. The City intervened in the suit. Following a bench trial, the trial court entered judgment in favor of the County. The City contends that pursuant to Indiana Code chapter 36-9-13, the Building Authority lacked the authority to agree to such a provision that voluntarily divested itself of the Center's title. Because we agree that the Building Authority lacked the statutory authority to agree to such a provision but also conclude that the County can still exercise a purchase option in the 1992 Lease, we reverse and remand to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.[1]

         Facts and Procedural History

         [¶2] In the 1950s, the City and the County formed the Building Authority to issue bonds in order to finance a City-County Building. Between 1991 and 1992, the City and County agreed that the Building Authority would again issue bonds in order to finance the construction of the Center, which would be joined to the City-County Building. An inter-local agreement provided that the Building Authority would own the Center and the County would lease it pursuant to the terms of the 1992 Lease entered into by the County and the Building Authority. The inter-local agreement also stated that the City would sublease space in the Center from the County. The County would finance the 1992 Lease payments using Economic Development Income Tax ("EDIT") revenues allocated from both the County's and the City's share of said revenues.

         [¶3] On September 3, 1992, the County and the Building Authority executed the 1992 Lease. The 1992 Lease was for a term of fifteen years, beginning in September of 1993 when the Center was ready for partial occupancy by the City police and County sheriff's departments. The 1992 Lease terms included a turnover provision ("the Turn-Over Provision") which provided that

[i]n the event [the County] has not exercised its option to purchase the [Center] in accordance with Section 9 hereof and has not exercised its option to renew this Lease in accordance with Section 10 hereof, then, upon expiration of this Lease and upon full performance by [the County] of its obligations under this Lease, the [Center] shall become the absolute property of [the County], and, upon [the County's] request, [the Building Authority] shall execute proper instruments conveying to [the County] all of [the Building Authority's] title thereto.

         Appellant's App. Vol. III p. 16-17. The 1992 Lease also included a statutory application provision ("the Statutory Application Provision") which provided that

[the Building Authority] was organized for the purpose of constructing and erecting the City County Building and leasing the same to [the County] under the provisions of the Indiana Code 36-9-13. All provisions herein contained shall be construed in accordance with the provisions of said Chapter, and to the extent of inconsistencies, if any, between the covenants and agreements in this Lease and provisions of said Chapter, the provisions of said Chapter shall be deemed to be controlling and binding upon [the Building Authority] and [the County].

Id. at 18.

         [¶4] After the 1992 Lease expired in September of 2008, the City and the County continued occupying the Center, splitting the operational costs according to the amount of space each occupied. In 2015, the County began negotiating a multi- million-dollar renovation of the Center with the Building Authority. By 2018, the County requested that the ...


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.