KEESLING v. TIPTON COUNTY PLAN COMMISSION, 1:14-cv-01628

Keeslings move for a preliminary injunction under Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(a) and Local Rule 65-2(a); hearing held Nov. 5, 2014; parties agreed to stipulate to entry of the injunction.
Prairie Acres Section 10 plat, recorded May 28, 2003, includes seven lots (66–72); Keeslings own Lot 71; Aperture owns Lots 68–69.
Plat Restrictions require residential use, minimum 1,600 sq ft, no outbuildings or commercial enterprises, covenants running with the land.
Aperture petitioned June 25, 2014 to vacate Lots 68–69 and remove restrictions to allow non-residential development; Plan Commission hearing held July 17, 2014 and approved.
Plan Commission failed to make written findings under Ind. Code § 36-7-4-711 and -714; Court enjoined Plan Commission from non-residential development and ordered restrictions to remain in effect.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Keeslings have likelihood of success on merits.	Keeslings argue covenants run with land and cannot be unilaterally vacated.	Plan Commission contends vacation complied with Indiana statute requirements.	Yes: likelihood established; improper vacation of covenants.
Whether there is an adequate remedy at law.	There is no adequate monetary remedy for unconstitutional taking of property rights.	Remedies at law may address damages, not facially improper vacation.	Yes: no adequate remedy at law.
Whether irreparable harm would occur without relief.	Non-residential development violates covenants, causing ongoing irreparable harm.	Harm could be quantified after litigation.	Yes: irreparable harm shown.
Balance of harms in granting injunction.	Protecting covenants benefits property rights of lot owners.	Plan Commission bears planning interests.	Injunctive relief favored for Keeslings.
Public interest in issuing injunction.	Public interest supports upholding constitutional property rights.	Public interests in redevelopment and zoning.	Public interest aligned with preliminary injunction.

Daniels v. The Area Plan Commission of Allen County, 306 F.3d 445 (7th Cir. 2002) (covenants running with land; vacation limited by statute)
Cundiff v. Schmitt Dev. Co., 649 N.E.2d 1063 (Ind. Ct. App. 1995) (written findings of fact required to review administrative decisions)
Holmes v. Bd. of Zoning Appeals, 634 N.E.2d 522 (Ind. Ct. App. 1994) (statutory review and findings in zoning decisions)
Brunswick Corp. v. Jones, 784 F.2d 271 (7th Cir. 1986) (low threshold for likelihood of success in injunctions)
Pulos v. James, 261 Ind. 279, 283 (Ind. 1973) (property rights granted by covenants; vacation criteria)