Indiana justices to rule on Evansville smoking ban

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Indiana Supreme Court accepted two cases last week for transfer, a pair of rulings from Vanderburgh County on the city of Evansville’s ordinance prohibiting smoking in certain places.

In 2006, the Evansville Common Council adopted an ordinance that prohibited smoking in workplaces and other public places in Evansville but exempted bars, private clubs and riverboats. On Feb. 13, 2012, the council adopted City of Evansville Ordinance G-2012-1 Amended with an effective date of April 1, 2012. The amended ordinance prohibits smoking in bars and private clubs but permits smoking on riverboats.

In separate lawsuits, VFW Posts and other fraternal organizations and the owners of numerous bars sought injunctive relief and a declaratory judgment that Ordinance G-2012-1 Amended violates Article 1, Section 23 of the Indiana Constitution. The lawsuit filed by the fraternal organizations also claimed the ordinance violates Article 1, Section 9. The trial court denied relief in both cases and the Court of Appeals affirmed on Feb. 15.

The smoking-ban lawsuits, Paul Stieler Enterprises, Inc., d/b/a Harbor Bay, et al. v. City of Evansville and Evansville Common Council, 82S01-1306-CT-436; and VFW Post 2953, et al. v. City of Evansville and Evansville Common Council, 82S01-1306-PL-437, are the only cases the Supreme Court took last week; it denied transfer to 25 cases. The complete list is available on the court’s website.


Post a comment to this story

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
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Great observation Smith. By my lights, speaking personally, they already have. They counted my religious perspective in a pro-life context as a symptom of mental illness and then violated all semblance of due process to banish me for life from the Indiana bar. The headline reveals the truth of the Hoosier elite's animus. Details here: Denied 2016 petition for cert (this time around): (“2016Pet”) Amicus brief 2016: (“2016Amici”) As many may recall, I was banned for five years for failing to "repent" of my religious views on life and the law when a bar examiner demanded it of me, resulting in a time out to reconsider my "clinging." The time out did not work, so now I am banned for life. Here is the five year time out order: Denied 2010 petition for cert (from the 2009 denial and five year banishment): (“2010Pet”) Read this quickly if you are going to read it, the elites will likely demand it be pulled down or pile comments on to bury it. (As they have buried me.)

  2. if the proabortion zealots and intolerant secularist anti-religious bigots keep on shutting down every hint of religious observance in american society, or attacking every ounce of respect that the state may have left for it, they may just break off their teeth.

  3. "drug dealers and traffickers need to be locked up". "we cannot afford just to continue to build prisons". "drug abuse is strangling many families and communities". "establishing more treatment and prevention programs will also be priorities". Seems to be what politicians have been saying for at least three decades now. If these are the most original thoughts these two have on the issues of drug trafficking and drug abuse, then we're no closer to solving the problem than we were back in the 90s when crack cocaine was the epidemic. We really need to begin demanding more original thought from those we elect to office. We also need to begin to accept that each of us is part of the solution to a problem that government cannot solve.

  4. What is with the bias exclusion of the only candidate that made sense, Rex Bell? The Democrat and Republican Party have created this problem, why on earth would anyone believe they are able to fix it without pushing government into matters it doesn't belong?

  5. This is what happens when daddy hands over a business to his moron son and thinks that everything will be ok. this bankruptcy is nothing more than Gary pulling the strings to never pay the creditors that he and his son have ripped off. they are scum and they know it.