City of Terre Haute v. Bass Enterprises, LLC, and VCA, LLC (mem. dec.), 84A01-1512-MI-2185

Bass Enterprises, LLC and VCA, LLC (Owners) own a rental house in Terre Haute; tenant (Codi Evans) accrued unpaid sewer charges of $988.88 covering Feb 1, 2013–Oct 17, 2014.
The City of Terre Haute sent a "Notice to Property Owner" on April 10, 2015 (Owners received it April 20, 2015) threatening a lien if unpaid; Owners had not previously been notified and had not provided the utility a forwarding address.
Owners filed for a temporary restraining order and declaratory judgment on April 21, 2015 to prevent a sewer lien; the trial court granted declaratory relief prohibiting the City from placing a lien.
The statutory question centered on Indiana Code § 36-9-23-32(c), which was amended effective July 1, 2014 to remove a requirement that non-occupant owners first provide the utility written notice of an address before the utility must send delinquency notice.
The City argued the trial court improperly applied the amended (post–July 1, 2014) statute to fees that accrued partly before that effective date (i.e., asserted improper retroactive application).
The court considered when the balance was fully accrued and when the City attempted to file a lien (April 2015) to determine which statute applied.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court erred by applying the amended § 36-9-23-32(c) instead of the prior version	Owners: The statute in effect when the City attempted to file the lien controls; City failed to provide the required notice under the current statute	City: The earlier statute should apply because delinquent fees accrued before the amendment, so applying the amendment is retroactive	Court: No error—apply the statute in effect when the balance was fully accrued and when City sought to file the lien (post-amendment); City did not provide the required notice under the current statute

Pinnacle Properties Dev. Grp., LLC v. City of Jeffersonville, 893 N.E.2d 726 (Ind. 2008) (explains statutory scheme for municipal sewer liens and enforcement mechanisms)
Robinson v. Valladares, 738 N.E.2d 278 (Ind. Ct. App. 2000) (statutory retroactivity depends on legislative intent)
Chesnut v. Roof, 665 N.E.2d 7 (Ind. Ct. App. 1996) (presumption against retrospective application of statutes absent clear legislative intent)
Gosnell v. Ind. Soft Water Serv., 503 N.E.2d 879 (Ind. 1987) (discusses prospective application of statutes)