Ind. Code » Title 36
Indiana Code

Ind. Code § 36-7-9-8 (2025)

Appeals

✓ 2025 Indiana Code: the 2026 session is not included
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaInd. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

     Sec. 8. (a) An action taken by the hearing authority under section 7(d), 7(e), or 9(d) of this chapter or a finding by the hearing authority of abandonment under IC 36-7-37 is subject to review by the circuit or superior court of the county in which the unsafe premises are located, on request of:

(1) any person who has a substantial property interest in the unsafe premises; or

(2) any person to whom that order or finding was issued.

     (b) A person requesting judicial review under this section must file a verified complaint including the findings of fact and the action taken by the hearing authority. The complaint must be filed within ten (10) days after the date when the action was taken.

     (c) An appeal under this section is an action de novo. The court may affirm, modify, or reverse the action taken by the hearing authority.

[Pre-Local Government Recodification Citation: 18-5-5.5-9.]

As added by Acts 1981, P.L.309, SEC.28. Amended by P.L.169-2006, SEC.61; P.L.247-2015, SEC.44.

 

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 26 cases (4 in the last 5 years), 1996–2024 · leading case: Kollar v. Civil City of South Bend, 695 N.E.2d 616 (Ind. Ct. App. 1998).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Kollar v. Civil City of South Bend, 695 N.E.2d 616 (Ind. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 8× “Indiana Code § 36-7-9-8 provides for judicial review of actions taken by a municipality to enforce building standards.”
Juan Vega v. City of Hammond & City of Hammond Bd. of Pub. Works & Saf., 80 N.E.3d 904 (Ind. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 8× “On May 11, 2015, Vega filed a complaint for judicial review pursuant to Ind. Code § 36-7-9-8 in the Lake Superior Court and attached Exhibits A-K, which included a copy of the Board’s Findings of Fact arid Decision and the City’s Findings-Order of May 7, 2015.”
Jose Andrade v. Hammond Bd. of Pub. Works, 9 F.4th 947 (7th Cir. 2021). “1974))); Ind. Code § 36-7-9-8 . We therefore need not consider whether true de novo review by a state court could bring a federal chal- lenge to a state administrative decision into Rooker-Feldman’s limited scope.”
Brown v. Anderson Bd. of Pub. Saf., 777 N.E.2d 1106 (Ind. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 4× “On October 2, 2001, Brown filed a motion to correct error, which the trial court denied. Brown now appeals.”
Groff v. City of Butler, 794 N.E.2d 528 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 4× “denied (citing Ind.Code § 36-7-9-8(c) (1997)). Under a de novo review, the trial court may, to a limited extent, weigh the evidence supporting the enforcement authority's findings of fact.”
Robert Graber, Jr. & Barbara Graber v. Allen Cnty., Indiana Bldg. Dep't, 988 N.E.2d 798 (Ind. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 16× “The Grabers’ motion stated that Ind. Code § 36-7-9-8 requires the findings of fact and action taken by the hearing authority to be included in the complaint and that they “have substantially complied with the spirit of the requirements for judicial review in that their petition…”
Jose Andrade v. City of Hammond & Hammond Bd. of Pub. Works & Saf., 114 N.E.3d 507 (Ind. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 2× “Ind. Code § 36-7-9-8 (a), (c). Under the de novo standard of review, a court may, to a limited extent, [weigh] the evidence supporting the finding of fact by an administrative agency.”
409 Land Trust v. City of South Bend, 709 N.E.2d 348 (Ind. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 2× “The Trust asserts that the Unsafe Building Law provides the Trust with a right to judicial review of the City’s order pursuant to Ind.Code § 36-7-9-8, which in turn entitles the Trust to a determination of whether the City’s action was arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of…”
Quaker Props., Inc. v. Dep't of Unsafe Bldgs., 842 N.E.2d 865 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 2× “Thus, Quaker waived its challenge to the findings and the opportunity to have the trial court conduct a de novo review of the evidence under Indiana Code section 36-7-9-8. 3 IL Propriety of Judgment Award Quaker next argues that the trial court erred in awarding judgment in the…”
Starzenski v. City of Elkhart, 659 N.E.2d 1132 (Ind. Ct. App. 1996). “COLLATERAL ATTACK Indiana Code 36-7-9-8 states, in part: (a) An action taken under section 7(d) of this chapter is subject to review by the cireuit or superior court of the county in which the unsafe premises are located, on request of: (1) any person who has a substantial…”
Read v. City of South Bend, 687 N.E.2d 265 (Ind. Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 3× “CODE § 36-7-9-8 (1993 Supp.). ' On August 28, 1995, South Bend filed its motion to dismiss.”
People of Conviction, Inc. v. Neighborhood Code Enf't (mem. dec.), No. 02A03-1704-MI-1138 (Ind. Ct. App. Mar. 16, 2018). · cites it 14× “I.C. § 36-7-9-8 (emphasis added).4 [18] The trial court, when reviewing a petition for judicial review of a demolition order under INDIANA CODE § 36-7-9-8, is required to review it under a de novo standard of review.”
Show all 26 citing cases →
Ind. Code § 36-7-9-8(a): 2 cases
People of Conviction, Inc. v. Neighborhood Code Enf't (mem. dec.), No. 02A03-1704-MI-1138 (Ind. Ct. App. Mar. 16, 2018). “I.C. § 36-7-9-8 (emphasis added).4 [18] The trial court, when reviewing a petition for judicial review of a demolition order under INDIANA CODE § 36-7-9-8, is required to review it under a de novo standard of review.”
Ronald E Davidhizar v. City of Goshen, Indiana, 247 N.E.3d 811 (Ind. Ct. App. 2024).
Ind. Code § 36-7-9-8(b): 6 cases
Philip R. Davis v. City of Fort Wayne, No. 02A03-1209-PL-385 (Ind. Ct. App. May 29, 2013).
Alan Van Meter v. Cmty. Dev. & Redevelopment, 152 N.E.3d 22 (Ind. Ct. App. 2020).
Andrade v. City of Hammond, No. 2:19-cv-00430 (N.D. Ind. Mar. 6, 2020).
Andrade v. Hammond City of, No. 2:15-cv-00134 (N.D. Ind. Mar. 6, 2020).
Ronald E Davidhizar v. City of Goshen, Indiana, 247 N.E.3d 811 (Ind. Ct. App. 2024).
Ind. Code § 36-7-9-8(c): 5 cases
Brown v. Anderson Bd. of Pub. Saf., 777 N.E.2d 1106 (Ind. Ct. App. 2002). “On October 2, 2001, Brown filed a motion to correct error, which the trial court denied. Brown now appeals.”
Groff v. City of Butler, 794 N.E.2d 528 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003). “denied (citing Ind.Code § 36-7-9-8(c) (1997)). Under a de novo review, the trial court may, to a limited extent, weigh the evidence supporting the enforcement authority's findings of fact.”
Ronald E Davidhizar v. City of Goshen, Indiana, 247 N.E.3d 811 (Ind. Ct. App. 2024).
Mark A. Valdes & James H. Valdes v. Vincennes Bldg. & Saf. Comm'n & the City of Vincennes, No. 42A01-1302-PL-88 (Ind. Ct. App. Nov. 27, 2013).
Andrade v. City of Hammond, No. 2:19-cv-00430 (N.D. Ind. Sept. 21, 2022).
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.