Sec. 3. (a) The legislative body of a municipality may,
by an ordinance defining the corporate boundaries of the municipality,
annex territory that is contiguous to the municipality, subject to
subsection (b).
(b) If territory that was not contiguous (under section 1.5 of this
chapter) was annexed in proceedings begun before May 1, 1981, an
ordinance adopted after April 30, 1981, may not annex additional
territory that is contiguous when the contiguity is based on the
additional territory's boundaries with the previously annexed territory.
(c) Subsection (b) does not apply when the previously annexed
territory has been used as a part of the contiguous boundary of separate
parcels of land successfully annexed to the municipality before May 1,
1981.
(d) This subsection does not apply to a town that has abolished town
legislative body districts under IC 36-5-2-4.1. An ordinance described
by subsection (a) must assign the territory annexed by the ordinance to
at least one (1) municipal legislative body district.
[Pre-Local Government Recodification Citation: 18-5-10-19
part.]
As added by Acts 1980, P.L.212, SEC.3. Amended by Acts
1981, P.L.308, SEC.2; P.L.333-1985, SEC.2; P.L.5-1989, SEC.91;
P.L.3-1993, SEC.262.
Notes of Decisions
Bradley v. City of New Castle, 730 N.E.2d 771 (Ind. Ct. App. 2000).
· cites it 6× “Remonstrators’ Allegations In paragraph 6(f), the Remonstrators allege that the City violated Ind.Code § 36-4-3-3 3 by failing to define the City’s corporate boundaries.”
Jackson v. City of Jeffersonville, 771 N.E.2d 703 (Ind. Ct. App. 2002).
· cites it 2× “Before we address Jackson's argument, we observe that Ind.Code § 36-4-3-3 permits a municipality to annex contiguous territory.”
Annexation Ordinance F-2008-15 v. City of Evansville, 955 N.E.2d 769 (Ind. Ct. App. 2011).
· cites it 2× “2 Property-owners of the parcels included in the proposed annexation may then challenge the proposed annexation by filing a remonstrance within ninety days.”
Brenwick Assocs., LLC v. Boone Cnty. Redevelopment Comm'n, 889 N.E.2d 289 (Ind. 2008).
· cites it 2× “See I.C. §§ 36-4-3-3, 4. 10 . In such circumstances, the county redevelopment commission (1) continues to receive allocations of property tax proceeds from the area annexed or included in the municipality's district for the commission’s allocation fund as if the annexation or…”
Town of Dyer v. Town of St. John, 919 N.E.2d 1196 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010).
· cites it 2× “2 Dyer's attempted annexation of 2669 acres in Dyer 18 was an "involuntary" annexation under Indiana Code Section 36-4-3-3. See Steele, 865 N.E.2d at 617 .”
Town of Brownsburg v. Fight Against Brownsburg Annexation, 98 N.E.3d 114 (Ind. Ct. App. 2018).
· cites it 2× “On cross-appeal, FABA argues that the trial court erred in determining that Brownsburg's fiscal plan met the five mandatory requirements of Subsection 13(d), in granting partial summary judgment to Brownsburg and finding that it provides fire protection to the Annexation Area,…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.