Court Opinion

ID: 9523578
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 02:44:21.726006+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:06:32.820765
License: Public Domain

Concurring Opinion
Sullivan, J.
I deem the dissenting opinion in State v. Holder and State v. Rentchler (1973), 260 Ind. 336, 295 N.E.2d 799 to be extremely persuasive insofar as it construes Trial Rule 41 (A) (2) to constitute authorization for the trial court in its discretion to assess attorney fees and expenses of trial preparation against the State as a term or condition of dismissal of the State’s exceptions to the appraisers’ report in an eminent domain action. We are, however, bound by the holding of the majority in Holder and Rentchler, supra. It is for this reason that I concur.
Note. — Reported at 297 N.E.2d 479.