About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

LOG IN
LOG IN


1997 Indiana Attorney General Reports and Opinions 1 (1997)

handle is hein.sag/sagin0023 and id is 1 raw text is: STATE OF INDIANA OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL JEFFREY A. MODISETT STATE HOUSE ATTORNEY GENERAL INDIANAPOLIS - April 10, 1997 The Honorable Allie Craycraft State Senator Third Floor, State House Indianapolis, Indiana 46204 Re: Official Opinion 97-1: Application of Article 2, § 9 of the Indiana Constitution Dear Senator Craycraft: This is in response to your letter, dated February 6, 1997, in which you requested an opinion concerning the applicability of Article 2, § 9 of the Indiana Constitution. You have asked whether either of the following situations violates the prohibition found in Article 2, § 9 against holding two lucrative offices found in Article 2, § 9: (1. an attorney serving simultaneously as county attorney, attorney for the metropolitan planning commission and the board of zoning appeals; or 2. an engineer serving simultaneously as county engineer, city engineer, and as a member of the sanitary board. For the reasons set forth below, an attorney occupying the three positions described in the first situation does not violate Article 2, § 9, because none of these positions constitutes a lucrative office. Further, the second factual situation gives rise to a violation only if the engineer positions referenced are the city traffic engineer or the county highway engineer. ANALYSIS Article 2, § 9 of the Indiana Constitution provides, in pertinent part, that: NOT PAID FOR AT TAXPAYERS EXPENSE