Marilyn Odendahl for www.theindianalawyer.com

A former prosecuting attorney who denied the truckloads of dirt dumped on his Boone County farm caused drainage problems got buried under a $519,400 fine.

The dispute began when the Boone County Plan Commission filed a complaint against Robert Blackford and his estranged wife. Alleging Blackford violated the zoning and drainage ordinances, the plan commission asserted he was storing a significant amount of dirt, concrete and debris on his property which was affecting drainage and creating the potential for off-site erosion and sedimentation.

Blackford filed a contempt-filled answer to the complaint.

“OH MY GOD!!!! (The plan commission’s executive director) found a significant amount of dirt on my farm! I admit it. There is a large amount of dirt on my property,” he wrote.

Blackford dismissed the allegations that the dirt and other materials were causing water to back up. Also, he stated that any Stop Work Order was void for lack of authority and admitted that he had ignored the previous correspondence from the plan commission.

Next, he filed a counterclaim, alleging the plan commission committed perjury in its complaint.

The plan commission’s assertion that he violated the drainage ordinance “is simply untrue on its face,” Blackford wrote. “It is unlikely anyone with a level of intelligence above that of (a) moron could conclude my activities on my property have affected drainage.”

In his counterclaim, Blackford also stated, “I am a former prosecutor.” However, he is not listed on the Indiana Roll of Attorneys.

The plan commission then moved to amend its complaint to include the drainage board. It argued the drainage board was an indispensible party because of the alleged violation of the county’s stormwater management ordinance.

Four days after the deadline to respond, Blackford filed a pro se Opposition to Plaintiff’s Motion to Amend Complaint. He maintained the amended complaint did not identify a single person as a plaintiff which the defendant could depose.

“Is the Court going to entertain a Notice of Deposition of Boone County Drainage Board? Who’s going to show up?” Blackford wrote. “… Is it possible that next week plaintiff’s attorney will move the court to add the FBI, the CIA and the Department of Homeland Security to the list of plaintiffs? Who am I dealing with here?”

Nine days later, the Boone Superior Court held a bench trial on the plan commission’s claim and Blackford’s counterclaim. Immediately, Blackford asked for a continuance, stating he had been short notice of the trial and was seeking counsel. He asserted the amended complaint had made the situation “way more complex.”

The trial court denied the oral request. It questioned his need for more time for research, noting he had addressed the issues in his response to the plan commission’s motion to amend. Moreover, the court did not agree that the amended complaint made the matter more complex since alleged violation of the drainage ordinance was in the original complaint.

The bench trial proceeded and Blackford cross-examined Boone County’s witnesses and presented his own witnesses. At the conclusion, the trial court found Blackford had violated the county’s drainage ordinance and was subject to a $519,400 fine plus $156 for court costs and $8,715 for attorney fees.

Blackford appealed. He argued, in part, the trial court abused its discretion by denying his continuance request. Blackford claimed he wanted to delay the trial so he could hire an attorney and the trial court’s denial violated his due process rights.

Boone County argued Blackford knew of the drainage ordinance violation allegations and did have time to prepare a defense, request a continuance or hire counsel before the trial.

The Indiana Court of Appeals agreed with Boone County that the trial court did not violate Blackford’s right to due process. It concluded the trial court did not abuse its discretion in Robert Blackford v. Boone County Area Plan Commission and Boone County Drainage Board, 06A01-1410-MI-437.

Looking at the Boone County dispute, the Court of Appeals noted Blackford had been an attorney, was representing himself and had filed various pleadings in this case. He had received notice of the order granting the plan commission’s motion to amend its complaint. Yet, Blackford waited until the trial to make an oral request for a continuance, claiming he had just become aware of the drainage ordinance violation.

In addition, Blackford acknowledged to the trial court that the nature of the amended complaint was not different from the original since both contained the allegation he violated the drainage ordinance.

The Court of Appeals pointed out Blackford’s continuance request was not supported by any evidence or showing of good cause as required by Indiana Trial Rule 53.5. Also, he did not articulate any good cause for the continuance or show that he would be prejudiced.A former prosecuting attorney who denied the truckloads of dirt dumped on his Boone County farm caused drainage problems got buried under a $519,400 fine.

The dispute began when the Boone County Plan Commission filed a complaint against Robert Blackford and his estranged wife. Alleging Blackford violated the zoning and drainage ordinances, the plan commission asserted he was storing a significant amount of dirt, concrete and debris on his property which was affecting drainage and creating the potential for off-site erosion and sedimentation.

Blackford filed a contempt-filled answer to the complaint.

“OH MY GOD!!!! (The plan commission’s executive director) found a significant amount of dirt on my farm! I admit it. There is a large amount of dirt on my property,” he wrote.

Blackford dismissed the allegations that the dirt and other materials were causing water to back up. Also, he stated that any Stop Work Order was void for lack of authority and admitted that he had ignored the previous correspondence from the plan commission.

Next, he filed a counterclaim, alleging the plan commission committed perjury in its complaint.

The plan commission’s assertion that he violated the drainage ordinance “is simply untrue on its face,” Blackford wrote. “It is unlikely anyone with a level of intelligence above that of (a) moron could conclude my activities on my property have affected drainage.”

In his counterclaim, Blackford also stated, “I am a former prosecutor.” However, he is not listed on the Indiana Roll of Attorneys.

The plan commission then moved to amend its complaint to include the drainage board. It argued the drainage board was an indispensible party because of the alleged violation of the county’s stormwater management ordinance.

Four days after the deadline to respond, Blackford filed a pro se Opposition to Plaintiff’s Motion to Amend Complaint. He maintained the amended complaint did not identify a single person as a plaintiff which the defendant could depose.

“Is the Court going to entertain a Notice of Deposition of Boone County Drainage Board? Who’s going to show up?” Blackford wrote. “… Is it possible that next week plaintiff’s attorney will move the court to add the FBI, the CIA and the Department of Homeland Security to the list of plaintiffs? Who am I dealing with here?”

Nine days later, the Boone Superior Court held a bench trial on the plan commission’s claim and Blackford’s counterclaim. Immediately, Blackford asked for a continuance, stating he had been short notice of the trial and was seeking counsel. He asserted the amended complaint had made the situation “way more complex.”

The trial court denied the oral request. It questioned his need for more time for research, noting he had addressed the issues in his response to the plan commission’s motion to amend. Moreover, the court did not agree that the amended complaint made the matter more complex since alleged violation of the drainage ordinance was in the original complaint.

The bench trial proceeded and Blackford cross-examined Boone County’s witnesses and presented his own witnesses. At the conclusion, the trial court found Blackford had violated the county’s drainage ordinance and was subject to a $519,400 fine plus $156 for court costs and $8,715 for attorney fees.

Blackford appealed. He argued, in part, the trial court abused its discretion by denying his continuance request. Blackford claimed he wanted to delay the trial so he could hire an attorney and the trial court’s denial violated his due process rights.

Boone County argued Blackford knew of the drainage ordinance violation allegations and did have time to prepare a defense, request a continuance or hire counsel before the trial.

The Indiana Court of Appeals agreed with Boone County that the trial court did not violate Blackford’s right to due process. It concluded the trial court did not abuse its discretion in Robert Blackford v. Boone County Area Plan Commission and Boone County Drainage Board, 06A01-1410-MI-437.

Looking at the Boone County dispute, the Court of Appeals noted Blackford had been an attorney, was representing himself and had filed various pleadings in this case. He had received notice of the order granting the plan commission’s motion to amend its complaint. Yet, Blackford waited until the trial to make an oral request for a continuance, claiming he had just become aware of the drainage ordinance violation.

In addition, Blackford acknowledged to the trial court that the nature of the amended complaint was not different from the original since both contained the allegation he violated the drainage ordinance.

The Court of Appeals pointed out Blackford’s continuance request was not supported by any evidence or showing of good cause as required by Indiana Trial Rule 53.5. Also, he did not articulate any good cause for the continuance or show that he would be prejudiced.
A former prosecuting attorney who denied the truckloads of dirt dumped on his Boone County farm caused drainage problems got buried under a $519,400 fine.

A former prosecuting attorney who denied the truckloads of dirt dumped on his Boone County farm caused drainage problems got buried under a $519,400 fine.

The dispute began when the Boone County Plan Commission filed a complaint against Robert Blackford and his estranged wife. Alleging Blackford violated the zoning and drainage ordinances, the plan commission asserted he was storing a significant amount of dirt, concrete and debris on his property which was affecting drainage and creating the potential for off-site erosion and sedimentation.

Blackford filed a contempt-filled answer to the complaint.

“OH MY GOD!!!! (The plan commission’s executive director) found a significant amount of dirt on my farm! I admit it. There is a large amount of dirt on my property,” he wrote.

Blackford dismissed the allegations that the dirt and other materials were causing water to back up. Also, he stated that any Stop Work Order was void for lack of authority and admitted that he had ignored the previous correspondence from the plan commission.

Next, he filed a counterclaim, alleging the plan commission committed perjury in its complaint.

The plan commission’s assertion that he violated the drainage ordinance “is simply untrue on its face,” Blackford wrote. “It is unlikely anyone with a level of intelligence above that of (a) moron could conclude my activities on my property have affected drainage.”

In his counterclaim, Blackford also stated, “I am a former prosecutor.” However, he is not listed on the Indiana Roll of Attorneys.

The plan commission then moved to amend its complaint to include the drainage board. It argued the drainage board was an indispensible party because of the alleged violation of the county’s stormwater management ordinance.

Four days after the deadline to respond, Blackford filed a pro se Opposition to Plaintiff’s Motion to Amend Complaint. He maintained the amended complaint did not identify a single person as a plaintiff which the defendant could depose.

“Is the Court going to entertain a Notice of Deposition of Boone County Drainage Board? Who’s going to show up?” Blackford wrote. “… Is it possible that next week plaintiff’s attorney will move the court to add the FBI, the CIA and the Department of Homeland Security to the list of plaintiffs? Who am I dealing with here?”

Nine days later, the Boone Superior Court held a bench trial on the plan commission’s claim and Blackford’s counterclaim. Immediately, Blackford asked for a continuance, stating he had been short notice of the trial and was seeking counsel. He asserted the amended complaint had made the situation “way more complex.”

The trial court denied the oral request. It questioned his need for more time for research, noting he had addressed the issues in his response to the plan commission’s motion to amend. Moreover, the court did not agree that the amended complaint made the matter more complex since alleged violation of the drainage ordinance was in the original complaint.

The bench trial proceeded and Blackford cross-examined Boone County’s witnesses and presented his own witnesses. At the conclusion, the trial court found Blackford had violated the county’s drainage ordinance and was subject to a $519,400 fine plus $156 for court costs and $8,715 for attorney fees.

Blackford appealed. He argued, in part, the trial court abused its discretion by denying his continuance request. Blackford claimed he wanted to delay the trial so he could hire an attorney and the trial court’s denial violated his due process rights.

Boone County argued Blackford knew of the drainage ordinance violation allegations and did have time to prepare a defense, request a continuance or hire counsel before the trial.

The Indiana Court of Appeals agreed with Boone County that the trial court did not violate Blackford’s right to due process. It concluded the trial court did not abuse its discretion in Robert Blackford v. Boone County Area Plan Commission and Boone County Drainage Board, 06A01-1410-MI-437.

Looking at the Boone County dispute, the Court of Appeals noted Blackford had been an attorney, was representing himself and had filed various pleadings in this case. He had received notice of the order granting the plan commission’s motion to amend its complaint. Yet, Blackford waited until the trial to make an oral request for a continuance, claiming he had just become aware of the drainage ordinance violation.

In addition, Blackford acknowledged to the trial court that the nature of the amended complaint was not different from the original since both contained the allegation he violated the drainage ordinance.

The Court of Appeals pointed out Blackford’s continuance request was not supported by any evidence or showing of good cause as required by Indiana Trial Rule 53.5. Also, he did not articulate any good cause for the continuance or show that he would be prejudiced.

The dispute began when the Boone County Plan Commission filed a complaint against Robert Blackford and his estranged wife. Alleging Blackford violated the zoning and drainage ordinances, the plan commission asserted he was storing a significant amount of dirt, concrete and debris on his property which was affecting drainage and creating the potential for off-site erosion and sedimentation.

Blackford filed a contempt-filled answer to the complaint.

“OH MY GOD!!!! (The plan commission’s executive director) found a significant amount of dirt on my farm! I admit it. There is a large amount of dirt on my property,” he wrote.

Blackford dismissed the allegations that the dirt and other materials were causing water to back up. Also, he stated that any Stop Work Order was void for lack of authority and admitted that he had ignored the previous correspondence from the plan commission.

Next, he filed a counterclaim, alleging the plan commission committed perjury in its complaint.

The plan commission’s assertion that he violated the drainage ordinance “is simply untrue on its face,” Blackford wrote. “It is unlikely anyone with a level of intelligence above that of (a) moron could conclude my activities on my property have affected drainage.”

In his counterclaim, Blackford also stated, “I am a former prosecutor.” However, he is not listed on the Indiana Roll of Attorneys.

The plan commission then moved to amend its complaint to include the drainage board. It argued the drainage board was an indispensible party because of the alleged violation of the county’s stormwater management ordinance.

Four days after the deadline to respond, Blackford filed a pro se Opposition to Plaintiff’s Motion to Amend Complaint. He maintained the amended complaint did not identify a single person as a plaintiff which the defendant could depose.

“Is the Court going to entertain a Notice of Deposition of Boone County Drainage Board? Who’s going to show up?” Blackford wrote. “… Is it possible that next week plaintiff’s attorney will move the court to add the FBI, the CIA and the Department of Homeland Security to the list of plaintiffs? Who am I dealing with here?”

Nine days later, the Boone Superior Court held a bench trial on the plan commission’s claim and Blackford’s counterclaim. Immediately, Blackford asked for a continuance, stating he had been short notice of the trial and was seeking counsel. He asserted the amended complaint had made the situation “way more complex.”  

The trial court denied the oral request. It questioned his need for more time for research, noting he had addressed the issues in his response to the plan commission’s motion to amend. Moreover, the court did not agree that the amended complaint made the matter more complex since alleged violation of the drainage ordinance was in the original complaint.

The bench trial proceeded and Blackford cross-examined Boone County’s witnesses and presented his own witnesses. At the conclusion, the trial court found Blackford had violated the county’s drainage ordinance and was subject to a $519,400 fine plus $156 for court costs and $8,715 for attorney fees.

Blackford appealed. He argued, in part, the trial court abused its discretion by denying his continuance request. Blackford claimed he wanted to delay the trial so he could hire an attorney and the trial court’s denial violated his due process rights.

Boone County argued Blackford knew of the drainage ordinance violation allegations and did have time to prepare a defense, request a continuance or hire counsel before the trial.

The Indiana Court of Appeals agreed with Boone County that the trial court did not violate Blackford’s right to due process. It concluded the trial court did not abuse its discretion in Robert Blackford v. Boone County Area Plan Commission and Boone County Drainage Board, 06A01-1410-MI-437.

Looking at the Boone County dispute, the Court of Appeals noted Blackford had been an attorney, was representing himself and had filed various pleadings in this case. He had received notice of the order granting the plan commission’s motion to amend its complaint. Yet, Blackford waited until the trial to make an oral request for a continuance, claiming he had just become aware of the drainage ordinance violation.  

In addition, Blackford acknowledged to the trial court that the nature of the amended complaint was not different from the original since both contained the allegation he violated the drainage ordinance.

The Court of Appeals pointed out Blackford’s continuance request was not supported by any evidence or showing of good cause as required by Indiana Trial Rule 53.5. Also, he did not articulate any good cause for the continuance or show that he would be prejudiced.
 

Indianapolis – Tomorrow, Governor Mike Pence will join the Indianapolis Airport Authority for a ceremony to commemorate the 14^th anniversary of 9/11, remembering the thousands of people who lost their lives and honoring the heroic acts of all responders. The remembrance will feature an Honor Guard, a musical performance by the Ben Davis High School choir and a displayed artifact of World Trade Center steel recovered from Ground Zero. Governor Pence will offer remarks prior to departing for Japan on his seventh international jobs and economic development mission. Details below.

Friday, September 11:

8:30 a.m. EDT – Governor Pence to commemorate 9/11 anniversary

*Media are welcome to attend.

Civic Plaza – Indianapolis International Airport, 7800 Col. H. Weir Cook Memorial Dr., Indianapolis, IN

**There will be an opportunity for B-roll and photos at 8:00 a.m. EDT at the Delta Airlines ticket counter as the Governor and First Lady arrive and check their luggage. Immediately following the 9/11 ceremony, Governor Pence, First Lady Karen Pence, and the delegation of Hoosier business and community leaders will have a media availability to discuss their trip to Japan.

Governor Mike Pence, First Lady Karen Pence and a delegation of Hoosier business and community leaders will travel to Japan tomorrow to bring jobs and investment to Indiana.

“With more than 250 Japan-owned businesses operating in Indiana today, the state’s relationship with Japan is crucial to our economy and continued job creation in the Hoosier State,” said Governor Pence. “Since January 2013, we have announced more than 2,100 new job commitments and nearly $800 million in planned capital investment from Japanese companies operating in Indiana. I’m looking forward to returning to the site of my first gubernatorial jobs mission to continue this momentum by sharing Indiana’s story as a state that works for business.”

This will be Pence’s seventh international trade mission and his second to Japan as Governor. Members of the state delegation include economic development professionals, local elected officials and business leaders representing industries such as manufacturing, compliance, construction, finance, legal and utilities. In addition to Governor Pence and First Lady Karen Pence, the state will be represented by Secretary of Commerce Victor Smith.

The cost of the state delegation is being covered through private donations to the Indiana Economic Development Foundation.

The Governor will depart Indiana tomorrow, Sept. 11, and return on Sept. 18. Below is the daily trip itinerary:

Sunday, Sept. 13

Governor Mike Pence will attend the Midwest U.S.-Japan Association Conference Executive Meeting and welcome reception in Tokyo. Pence is one of five Midwest representatives, including four governors and one lieutenant governor, scheduled to attend the conference.

Monday, Sept. 14

Governor Pence will address attendees at the opening ceremony of the Midwest-U.S. Japan Association Conference and meet with representatives from Honda Motor Company and Mitsubishi Heavy Industries. Both Japan-based companies have operations in Indiana. The Governor and members of the delegation will also meet with executives of Hitatchi Ltd. to learn about the company’s new Smart City technology.

The First Lady will visit the Tokyo International School during the day before joining the Governor to attend the conference’s annual dinner.

Tuesday, Sept. 15

The Governor and Indiana delegates will meet with business executives from Japanese companies with Indiana operations, including Mitsu Kinzoku, Mitsubishi Corporation and Subaru, which combined employ more than 7,500 associates in the Hoosier State. They will also meet with representatives from Marubeni, one of the top five largest Japanese trading companies, and Keidanren, Japan’s largest business lobby, which sent a delegation to Indiana earlier this summer.

The First Lady will visit NPO Resilience, a Tokyo-based non-profit organization that provides seminars for victims of domestic violence. In the evening, the Governor and the First Lady will host a Friends of Indiana reception with representatives from Japanese companies with operations or investment in Indiana.

 

Wednesday, Sept. 16

The Governor, First Lady and delegation will travel by train to Kyoto to visit Japanese cultural and historical sites. The delegation will then travel by train to Nagoya.

Thursday, Sept. 17

Governor Pence and members of the delegation will conduct business meetings with executives from Aisin, Toyota Industries Corporation, Toyota Motor Corporation and Toyota Tsusho Corporation. Together, these companies employ more than 8,000 Hoosiers through their Indiana operations.

In 2014, Aisin Chemical Indiana and Aisin Drivetrain announced plans to invest $45.35 million into their Crothersville operations, creating up to 74 new jobs. Just last month, Toyota Industrial Equipment Manufacturing (TIEM), which is a joint venture of Toyota Industries Corporation and Toyota Motor Corporation, announced plans to invest $16 million to expand its Columbus campus by 50,000 square feet.

Mrs. Pence will travel to Miyoshi, the sister city of Columbus, Indiana, to conduct an art exchange with fourth grade students at Miyoshigaoka Elementary School. In the evening, the Governor and the First Lady will host a Friends of Indiana reception in Nagoya.

Friday, Sept. 18

The Governor, First Lady and the Indiana delegation will return to Indiana from Nagoya.

Members of the official delegation are:

Governor Mike Pence

First Lady Karen Pence

Victor Smith, Indiana Secretary of Commerce

Steve Akard, Indiana Economic Development Corporation (IEDC)

Marvin Blade, Duke Energy

Kai Chuck, IEDC

James Finan, AEP/Indiana Michigan Power

Clayton Force, Force Construction

Harold Force, Force Construction

Abby Gras, IEDC

Harold Gutzwiller, Hoosier Energy

Bill Hanna, Northwest Indiana Regional Development Authority

Jason Hester, Columbus Economic Development Board

Melanie Walker Hart, Japan-America Society of Indiana and Tsuchiya Group North America

Rebecca Helmke, IEDC

Christina Householder, Cass County Economic Development

Larry Ingraham, Ingraham & Associates

Michael Kern, Gaylor Inc.

Theresa Kulczak, Japan-American Society of Indiana

James Lienhoop, City of Columbus

Cynthia Madrick, Cornerstone Environmental, Health and Safety Inc.

Kendall Millard, Barnes & Thornburg

Mark Miller, Cornerstone Environmental, Health and Safety Inc.

Sara Miller, Old National Bank

Paul Mitchell, Energy Systems Network

Brenda Morrissey, Office of the First Lady

Peter Morse, Barnes & Thornburg LLP

Hide Niiyama, Barnes & Thornburg LLP

Yukihito Ozaki, Force Construction

Richard Pease, Pease International Ventures

Jim Plump, Jackson County Economic Development Corporation

Tom Prather, DEEM LLC

Susan Reed, Indiana Municipal Power Agency

Michael Roeder, Vectren Corporation

Paul Roland, IEDC

Dale Stackhouse, Ice Miller LLP

William Stephan, Indiana University

Thomas Zupancic, DEEM LLC

Two members of the Governor’s security detail will also travel.