ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT            ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEES

Jeffrey W. Waggoner                Michael D. Marine
Indianapolis, Indiana            Indianapolis, Indiana

                            Bradley L. Williams
                            Indianapolis, Indiana

BRADLEY A. TURNER,                )
                                    )
    Appellant (Plaintiff Below      ),    )
                                    )    82S05-0008-CV-479
                                    )    in the Supreme Court
        v.                          )             
             
                                   
                                   
                                                          )    82A05-9908-CV-358
CITY OF EVANSVILLE, et al.,         )    in the Court of Appeals
                                    )
    Appellees (Defendants Below     ).    )

All three of Turner’s appeals remain pending before the Merit Commission. Before they could be heard, Turner filed a lawsuit challenging the past and present Chiefs’ right to office, the ordinance establishing the Merit Commission and an agreement between the City and the Fraternal Order of Police. He asked the court to enjoin the Commission from conducting a disciplinary hearing while his lawsuit proceeded. The court issued such an order, and it still pends.

The trial court granted summary judgment for the defendants. The Court of Appeals affirmed. Among other things, it held the Evansville Police Merit Commission was properly constituted under the relevant statutes and that the Chief of Police was obliged by Article 6, section 6 of the Indiana Constitution to live inside the city limits. Turner v. City of Evansville, 729 N.E.2d 149 (Ind. Ct. App. 2000). We grant transfer and vacate the decision of the Court of Appeals.
    
    

(Citation omitted.)

    Turner appropriately filed a notice of appeal of each of his suspensions with the Merit Commission, which would go forward but for the restraining order obtained by Turner. This right of appeal from discipline by a Chief is common in Indiana’s various statutory schemes. See, e.g., Ind. Code Ann. § 36-8-3.5-19(b)(West 1997). A decision by the commission is also subject to judicial review. Ind. Code Ann. § 36-8-3.5-18 (West 1997). Turner’s challenges to the Chief’s authority, and the Commission’s own compliance with relevant statutes may be challenged before the body and subsequently raised in court through the process of judicial review. See, e.g., City of Marion v. Antrobus, 448 N.E.2d 325 (Ind. Ct. App. 1983)(board whose composition was challenged at officer’s disciplinary hearing later held on judicial review to be unlawfully constituted, officer’s suspension reversed). To preserve these issues for judicial review, Turner must first present them at the administrative hearing. See Sullivan v. City of Evansville, 728 N.E.2d 182 (Ind. Ct. App. 2000)(plaintiff waived challenge to authority of police chief by failing to make a timely objection at the hearing).
    
    Turner was required to pursue his administrative remedies and may not avoid doing so through this collateral action. See footnote Consequently, the trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to address the merits of Turner’s amended complaint.

Dickson, Sullivan, Boehm, Rucker, JJ., concur.
Boehm, J., concurs with opinion, in which Dickson and Rucker, JJ., join.
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT            ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEES

Jeffrey W. Waggoner                Michael D. Marine
Indianapolis, Indiana                Indianapolis, Indiana

                            Bradley L. Williams
                            Indianapolis, Indiana

________________________________________________________________________

BRADLEY A. TURNER ,            )
                        )
Appellant(Plaintiff Below),            )     Indiana Supreme Court
                        )    Cause No. 82S05-0008-CV-479
        v.                )    
                        )    Indiana Court of Appeals
CITY OF EVANSVILLE et al.,        )    Cause No. 82A05-9908-CV-358
                        )
Appellees (Defendants Below).        )
________________________________________________________________________

    DICKSON and RUCKER, JJ., concur.