Richard Thomas v. Indiana Bureau of Motor Vehicles
979 N.E.2d 169
Ind. Ct. App.2012Background
- Thomas received his third qualifying driving conviction within ten years, triggering HTV status under Indiana Code 9-30-10-4(b).
- BMV notified Thomas of HTV qualification and a ten-year driving-privileges suspension (Jan 12, 2012–Jan 24, 2022).
- Thomas challenged via administrative review, which the BMV affirmed, and then sought judicial review.
- Thomas’ qualifying convictions include 2001 DUI, 2008 reckless driving, and 2008 OWI-endangering; the 2008 May conviction triggered HTV.
- The trial court held there was no applicable statute of limitations for HTV determinations, and did not powers to impose one.
- On appeal, Thomas argued untimely notice (statute of limitations) and, alternatively, laches; the court affirmed the BMV and rejected laches.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Statute of limitations for HTV determinations | Thomas: ten-year limit applies from first conviction | BMV/Thomas: general ten-year limit applies only after HTV status occurs | General ten-year limit applies, accrues when HTV status arises |
| Laches applicability to HTV suspension | Thomas: prolonged delay would be extreme unfairness to him | Ackman exception unlikely; public welfare interest supports enforcement | Laches inapplicable; not extreme unfairness and public interest served by HTV suspension |
Key Cases Cited
- Indiana Spine Group, PC v. Pilot Travel Ctrs., LLC, 959 N.E.2d 789 (Ind. 2011) (general ten-year statute can supply limitations when none specific exists)
- McNeil v. Ind. Bureau of Motor Vehicles, 931 N.E.2d 897 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010) (HTV status determination not a forfeiture; two-year limit not applicable)
- Ackman v. Indiana Real Estate Comm’n, 766 N.E.2d 1269 (Ind. Ct. App. 2002) (extreme government-launched equitable defense not generally available)
- U.S. v. Lindberg Corp., 882 F.2d 1158 (7th Cir. 1989) (equitable defenses may be limited against government)