You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Indianapolis Yellow Cab, Inc. v. Indiana Civil Rights Commission

Citations: 570 N.E.2d 940; 1991 Ind. App. LEXIS 701; 1991 WL 69543Docket: 49A02-9003-CV-182

Court: Indiana Court of Appeals; April 29, 1991; Indiana; State Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

Indianapolis Yellow Cab, Inc. appealed the trial court's dismissal of its petition for judicial review of a decision by the Indiana Civil Rights Commission, which found the company had engaged in religious discrimination against Amarjit Singh Sher, a Sikh denied employment unless he removed his turban. The trial court dismissed the petition due to untimely filing of the agency record, citing jurisdictional requirements under the Administrative Orders and Procedures Act, which requires the agency record to be submitted within thirty days of the petition's filing. Yellow Cab argued that a corrected final order issued by the Commission extended the filing deadline, but the court determined that the correction was procedural and did not restart the filing timeline. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's decision, emphasizing the importance of adhering to procedural timelines for judicial review. Consequently, Yellow Cab's petition was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, as the required record was filed one day late.

Legal Issues Addressed

Correction of Clerical Errors in Agency Orders

Application: The court determined that the agency's correction was procedural and did not extend the filing deadline, as it was not considered formal agency action.

Reasoning: This correction was deemed procedural, not substantive, and did not qualify as formal agency action since an agency cannot modify a final order once a reviewing court has taken jurisdiction.

Filing Deadlines and Jurisdiction

Application: A petition cannot be reviewed if the jurisdictional filing deadline is missed, and the reviewing court can dismiss such petitions on its own initiative.

Reasoning: The fifteen-day filing requirement for petitions is jurisdictional and cannot be waived, meaning that complaints cannot be reviewed if this deadline is missed. The reviewing court has the authority to dismiss petitions sua sponte, indicating that jurisdictional defects can be raised at any time and cannot be consented to by the parties involved.

Jurisdictional Requirements under Administrative Orders and Procedures Act

Application: The court dismissed the petition due to the failure to file the agency record within the statutory thirty-day period, emphasizing that compliance with this requirement is mandatory for jurisdiction.

Reasoning: The trial court agreed, citing jurisdictional issues under the Administrative Orders and Procedures Act, which mandates that the agency record must be submitted within thirty days of the petition's filing.