Baca v. RPM, INC.
941 N.E.2d 547
| Ind. Ct. App. | 2011Background
- Baca, indigent and disabled, attempted to file a claim but could not pay the $76 filing fee.
- Court personnel informed her she could perform 16 hours of community service to have the complaint filed.
- At a hearing, counsel from Indiana Legal Services argued the policy was questionable and Baca could not perform it.
- Judge pro tempore directed that Baca’s claim be filed but hearing date would be delayed until she completed 4 hours of community service.
- The judge certified the order for interlocutory appeal; the Court of Appeals accepted jurisdiction.
- The issue is whether the local rule requiring community service is enforceable as a duly promulgated local rule; the policy is not properly promulgated and is unenforceable.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Tippecanoe Superior Court 4’s community service policy is enforceable. | Baca argues the policy is not a duly promulgated local rule. | The court’s standing policy operates as a local rule. | Policy is unenforceable; the interlocutory order is reversed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Gill v. Evansville Sheet Metal Works, Inc., 940 N.E.2d 328 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010) (local rules function; need proper promulgation under Trial Rule 81)
- Magnuson v. Billings, 152 Ind. 177, 52 N.E. 803 (1899) (a court rule is a legal act of procedure binding on litigants)
- Trinity Homes, LLC v. Fang, 848 N.E.2d 1065 (Ind. 2006) (prima facie error standard in interlocutory appeals)