Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Legal And Litigation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners authorize amended complaint and dual representation in Sewer District dispute
Summary
The board authorized the county attorney to amend a declaratory-judgment suit over the Marshall County Regional Sewer District, add a quo warranto claim and consented to dual representation adding an appointee as a party.
Get email alerts on the Legal And Litigation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Marshall County commissioners on Aug. 4 authorized the county attorney to amend a pending lawsuit against the Marshall County Regional Sewer District to add a quo warranto claim and to add a county appointee as a party. Commissioners also approved a consent for dual representation allowing County Attorney Sean Cerisi to represent both the Board and the appointee, and the documents were filed with the court during the meeting.
The litigation stems from a dispute over board appointments to the Marshall County Regional Sewer District. Cerisi told commissioners the Sewer District’s attorneys had filed a motion to dismiss, arguing that the only proper procedural vehicle to challenge a person’s right to hold office is a quo warranto action — and that only the county prosecutor or a statutorily authorized person may bring such an action. Cerisi said he researched cited cases and concluded a declaratory-judgment action combined with a quo warranto claim was permissible; he recommended amending the complaint to add quo warranto and to make the county appointee (identified in filings as Mr. Woodward) a party to the case for efficiency.
Cerisi said the Sewer District’s brief cited precedent selectively and that an existing Indiana Court of Appeals decision involving the City of Bloomington shows declaratory and quo warranto claims can coexist in the same case. He recommended adding the quo warranto claim and obtaining a written consent for dual representation; commissioners approved both steps and the chair signed the consent. Cerisi said he would not seek attorney fees and that adding the appointee to the action would not materially increase attorney time because the documents needed would largely track the work already prepared on the county’s behalf.
The board’s actions were framed by earlier public input and by the Sewer District’s own public remarks at a March meeting that, according to commissioners, challenged them to pursue relief through the commissioners’ office. The board approved the amended-complaint filing and authorized Cerisi to represent both parties under a signed consent.

