Paul Stieler Enterprises, Inc. v. City of Evansville and Evansville Common Council
A number of bars and fraternal organizations sued the city of Evansville challenging its ordinance prohibiting smoking in bars and restaurants but exempting riverboat casinos. The state Supreme Court overturned an earlier decision and struck down the ordinance. The court said that the ordinance violates the Equal Privileges and Immunities Clause of the state constitution because it gives an advantage to the riverboat casino – an exemption from the smoking ban – that is not provided to similarly situated bars and clubs. Because the court found that the exemption for riverboat casinos could not be separated from the main ordinance it struck down the entire ordinance as unconstitutional.
Paul Stieler Enters., Inc. v. City of Evansville, Nos. 82S01-1306-CT-436 and 82S01-1306-PL-437 (Ind. 2014).
Limitations regarding the use of quotes The quotes provided here reflect statements from a specific decision. Accordingly, the International Legal Consortium (ILC) cannot guarantee that an appellate court has not reversed a lower court decision which may influence the applicability or influence of a given quote. All quotes have been selected based on the subjective evaluations undertaken by the ILC meaning that quotes provided here may not accurately or comprehensively represent a given court’s opinion or conclusion, as such quotes may have originally appeared alongside other negative opinions or accompanying facts. Further, some quotes are derived from unofficial English translations, which may alter their original meaning. We emphasize the need to review the original decision and related decisions before authoritatively relying on quotes. Using quotes provided here should not be construed as legal advice and is not intended to be a substitute for legal counsel on any subject matter in any jurisdiction. Please see the full limitations at https://www.tobaccocontrollaws.org/about.
"As to the first prong of Collins, we find that the Amending Ordinance violates Article 1, Section 23 of the Indiana Constitution because by prohibiting smoking in bars and clubs but permitting smoking in riverboat casinos, the enactment provides an unequal privilege that is not reasonably related to the inherent distinguishing characteristics of the two affected groups. Because compliance with Section 23 requires satisfaction of both the first and second prong of Collins, the failure to satisfy the first prong obviates the need to discuss the second prong.
We hold that the Amending Ordinance, on its face, violates the Equal Privileges and Immunities Clause of the Indiana Constitution because the disparate treatment—exempting floating casinos with "riverboat" statutory gambling authorization but not land-based bars and clubs, including those with gambling authorization from other statutory sources—is not reasonably related to the inherent differences between the divergently-treated classes."
Limitations regarding the use of quotes The quotes provided here reflect statements from a specific decision. Accordingly, the International Legal Consortium (ILC) cannot guarantee that an appellate court has not reversed a lower court decision which may influence the applicability or influence of a given quote. All quotes have been selected based on the subjective evaluations undertaken by the ILC meaning that quotes provided here may not accurately or comprehensively represent a given court’s opinion or conclusion, as such quotes may have originally appeared alongside other negative opinions or accompanying facts. Further, some quotes are derived from unofficial English translations, which may alter their original meaning. We emphasize the need to review the original decision and related decisions before authoritatively relying on quotes. Using quotes provided here should not be construed as legal advice and is not intended to be a substitute for legal counsel on any subject matter in any jurisdiction. Please see the full limitations at https://www.tobaccocontrollaws.org/about.
A number of bars and fraternal organizations sued the city of Evansville challenging its ordinance prohibiting smoking in bars and restaurants but exempting riverboat casinos. The state Supreme Court overturned an earlier decision and struck down the ordinance. The court said that the ordinance violates the Equal Privileges and Immunities Clause of the state constitution because it gives an advantage to the riverboat casino – an exemption from the smoking ban – that is not provided to similarly situated bars and clubs. Because the court found that the exemption for riverboat casinos could not be separated from the main ordinance it struck down the entire ordinance as unconstitutional.