An Indiana Declaratory Judgment

Abstract

It is an aphorism that the greatest enemies of law reform, and particularly of procedural reform, are the lawyers. A striking exemplification of the axiom may be found in Brindley v. Meara, decided by the Supreme Court of Indiana, November 18, 1935, 198 N. E. 301. That was the second of two appearances before the Supreme Court of the members of the advisory board of North Township, Lake County. They had already successfully brought an action for a declaratory judgment, construing a statute which determined that they and not the defendant, township trustee, had the power to select the persons that shall be employed by the trustee as investigators or assistants in discharging duties concerning the relief of the poor. 194 N. E. 351. Later on, the trustee apparently annoyed the advisory board by publishing certain articles attacking their integrity and impartiality, and threatened to hamper and harass the board in the performance of their duties. They then petitioned the court a second time "as further relief" for an order enjoining the trustee from "interfering [with] harassing and annoying your petitioners."