ILNews

County surveyor not entitled to additional compensation, rules court

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Indiana Court of Appeals has denied the Gibson County surveyor’s claims that under statute, he is entitled to a higher salary and additional compensation for referencing corners in the county.

Michael W. Stevenson took office in 2005 when he was not a licensed surveyor, but obtained his license in June of that year. The prior surveyor had been licensed. Stevenson’s initial salary was $36,170.

In 2006, he sought a pay increase of 1.5 times what he currently made since he was now licensed, based on I.C. 36-2-12-15(b). This statute requires a licensed surveyor be paid 1.5 times the amount of an unlicensed surveyor. The county council instead added a note to the budget indicating the salary for an unlicensed surveyor would be 1.5 times less than what Stevenson made. Stevenson made this request each budget year through 2012, and was denied each time.

In 2009, he sought additional compensation for referencing all 1,959 corners in Gibson County. Statute says the surveyor receives $4 per corner referenced. This compensation was also denied, leading to the current lawsuit.

In Michael W. Stevenson v. County Commissioners of Gibson County, Indiana, Bob Townsend, Don Whitehead, Gerald Bledsoe, County Council of Gibson County, Indiana, Tony Wolfe, Jeremy Overton, et al., 26A01-1212-PL-540, the Court of Appeals found no abuse of discretion in the trial court’s decision, which held the council met its statutory obligations by establishing the lower salary for the unlicensed surveyor instead of increasing Stevenson’s salary.

There was also no error in finding he is not entitled to $35,580 in additional compensation for seven years of unpaid corner references he allegedly completed. The COA rejected his claims that to receive compensation he is required to only “have a book of records” and “sit there and draw the money.”

The statute requires the surveyor check and reference at least 5 percent of all corners in the county each year, meaning perform a physical inspection and note the condition of the monument and references in order to be compensated.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

  • 1.5 times less???
    Wouldn't a salary that is 1.5 less than the current licensed surveyor's salary mean an unlicensed surveyor would be paying the county $18,085 per year for the privilege of working!

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Indianapolis employers harassment among minorities AFRICAN Americans needs to be discussed the metro Indianapolis area is horrible when it comes to harassing African American employees especially in the local healthcare facilities. Racially profiling in the workplace is an major issue. Please make it better because I'm many civil rights leaders would come here and justify that Indiana is a state the WORKS only applies to Caucasian Americans especially in Hamilton county. Indiana targets African Americans in the workplace so when governor pence is trying to convince people to vote for him this would be awesome publicity for the Presidency Elections.

  2. Wishing Mary Willis only God's best, and superhuman strength, as she attempts to right a ship that too often strays far off course. May she never suffer this personal affect, as some do who attempt to change a broken system: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QojajMsd2nE

  3. Indiana's seatbelt law is not punishable as a crime. It is an infraction. Apparently some of our Circuit judges have deemed settled law inapplicable if it fails to fit their litmus test of political correctness. Extrapolating to redefine terms of behavior in a violation of immigration law to the entire body of criminal law leaves a smorgasbord of opportunity for judicial mischief.

  4. I wonder if $10 diversions for failure to wear seat belts are considered moral turpitude in federal immigration law like they are under Indiana law? Anyone know?

  5. What a fine article, thank you! I can testify firsthand and by detailed legal reports (at end of this note) as to the dire consequences of rejecting this truth from the fine article above: "The inclusion and expansion of this right [to jury] in Indiana’s Constitution is a clear reflection of our state’s intention to emphasize the importance of every Hoosier’s right to make their case in front of a jury of their peers." Over $20? Every Hoosier? Well then how about when your very vocation is on the line? How about instead of a jury of peers, one faces a bevy of political appointees, mini-czars, who care less about due process of the law than the real czars did? Instead of trial by jury, trial by ideological ordeal run by Orwellian agents? Well that is built into more than a few administrative law committees of the Ind S.Ct., and it is now being weaponized, as is revealed in articles posted at this ezine, to root out post moderns heresies like refusal to stand and pledge allegiance to all things politically correct. My career was burned at the stake for not so saluting, but I think I was just one of the early logs. Due, at least in part, to the removal of the jury from bar admission and bar discipline cases, many more fires will soon be lit. Perhaps one awaits you, dear heretic? Oh, at that Ind. article 12 plank about a remedy at law for every damage done ... ah, well, the founders evidently meant only for those damages done not by the government itself, rabid statists that they were. (Yes, that was sarcasm.) My written reports available here: Denied petition for cert (this time around): http://tinyurl.com/zdmawmw Denied petition for cert (from the 2009 denial and five year banishment): http://tinyurl.com/zcypybh Related, not written by me: Amicus brief: http://tinyurl.com/hvh7qgp

ADVERTISEMENT