contract made violation in Indiana

32 Indiana opinions name it 2 courts 1871–2017 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Indiana courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (9)

Case	Followed	Cited
Continental Basketball Ass'n v. Ellenstein Enterprises, Inc.green ind · 1996 · cited in 3 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 1997–2012 2 sentences 2012See Continental Basketball Ass‟n, 669 N.E.2d at 140 (concluding that a contract made in violation of the Indiana Franchise Acts was not automatically void because the legislature did not use the terms “void” or “unenforceable” in the statute and included a remedial provision for violations). 2012See Continental Basketball Ass’n, 669 N.E.2d at 140 (concluding that a contract made in violation of the Indiana Franchise Acts was not automatically void because the legislature did not use the terms “void” or “unenforceable” in the statute and included a remedial provision for violations).	3	3
Harbour v. Arelco, Inc.green ind · 1997 · cited in 2 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 2005–2014 2 sentences 2014Harbour v. Arelco, Inc., 678 N.E.2d 381, 385 (Ind.1997); see also 17A C.J.S. 2005See Harbour v. Arelco, Inc., 678 N.E.2d 381, 385 (Ind.1997) ("Generally, a contract made in violation of a statute is void.")	2	2
Hoffman v. Dunngreen indctapp · 1986 · cited in 5 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 1989–2000 2 sentences 2000See id. (citing Hoffman v. Dunn, 496 N.E.2d 818, 822 (Ind.Ct.App.1986)). 1994First Federal Savings Bank v. Galvin (1993), Ind.App., 616 N.E.2d 1048, 1052 , trans. denied; Hoffman v. Dunn (1986), Ind.App., 496 N.E.2d 818 (holding exclusive listing contract void because not signed by licensed broker).	1	5
Tolliver v. Mathasgreen indctapp · 1987 · cited in 3 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 1993–2004 2 sentences 2004It is true that as a general proposition a contract made in violation of a statute is void and unenforceable. 1 See 39 Tolliver v. Mathas, 512 N.E.2d 187, 189 (Ind.Ct.App.1987), trans. denied, (Ind.Ct.App.1989). 1994*Tolliver v. Mathas (1987), Ind.App., 512 N.E.2d 187 , on [reh'g ], 538 N.E.2d 971 , trans. denied.	1	3
Lee v. Stategreen ind · 2004 · cited in 2 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 2014–2017 2 sentences 2017A plea agreement is contractual in nature, and “a contract made in violation of a statute is void and unenforceable.” State v. Arnold, 27 N.E.3d 315, 321 (Ind. Ct. App. 2015) (quoting Lee, 816 N.E.2d at 38 ), reh’g de-nied, trnns. denied. 2014But, “as a general proposition[,] a contract made in violation of a statute is void and unenforceable.” Lee v. State, 816 N.E.2d 35, 38 (Ind.2004). *943 However, it is also true that if a contract contains an illegal provision that can be eliminated without frustrating the basic purpose of the contract, the court will enforce the remainder of the contract.	1	2
First Federal Savings Bank of Indiana v. Galvingreen indctapp · 1993 · cited in 2 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 1994–2000 2 sentences 2000See id. (citing Hoffman v. Dunn, 496 N.E.2d 818, 822 (Ind.Ct.App.1986)). 1994First Federal Savings Bank v. Galvin (1993), Ind.App., 616 N.E.2d 1048, 1052 , trans. denied; Hoffman v. Dunn (1986), Ind.App., 496 N.E.2d 818 (holding exclusive listing contract void because not signed by licensed broker).	1	2
State of Indiana v. John J. Arnoldgreen indctapp · 2015 · cited in 1 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 2017–2017 1 sentence 2017A plea agreement is contractual in nature, and “a contract made in violation of a statute is void and unenforceable.” State v. Arnold, 27 N.E.3d 315, 321 (Ind. Ct. App. 2015) (quoting Lee, 816 N.E.2d at 38 ), reh’g de-nied, trnns. denied.	1	1
Jaehnen v. Bookergreen indctapp · 2004 · cited in 1 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 2012–2012 2 sentences 2012Jaehnen v. Booker, 806 N.E.2d 31, 36 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004), trans. denied. 2012Jaehnen v. Booker, 806 N.E.2d 31, 36 (Ind.Ct.App.2004), tram, denied.	1	1
Miller v. Stategreen indctapp · 2003 · cited in 1 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 2005–2005 1 sentence 2005As a result, such plea agreements are void and unenforceable." Id. at 779 (citation omitted). 5 .	1	1

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

Case	Negative	Cited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Indiana. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (14)

Case	Cited	Years
Maddox v. Yocum green indctapp · 1941 2 sentences 1987Maddox v. Yocum (1941), 109 Ind.App. 416 , 31 N.E.2d 652 ; 6 L.L.E. § 3. 1987Maddox v. Yocum (1941), 109 Ind.App. 416 , 31 N.E.2d 652 ; 6 L.L.E. § 3.	4	1980–1987
Brokaw v. Brokaw green indctapp · 1980 2 sentences 2010Brokaw, 398 N.E.2d at 1388 . 2010Brokaw, 398 N.E.2d at 1888 .	3	1986–2010
Tolliver v. Mathas green indctapp · 1989 2 sentences 1994Tolliver v. Mathas (1987), Ind.App., 512 N.E.2d 187 , on [reh'g ], 538 N.E.2d 971 , trans. denied. 1993Tolliver v. Mathas (1987), Ind.App., 512 N.E.2d 187 , on rehearing, 538 N.E.2d 971 , trans. denied.	3	1991–1994
Miller v. Jackson Township green ind · 1912 2 sentences 1975Bank, supra; Lee v. York School Tp. (1904), 163 Ind. 339 .’ “In Miller v. Jackson, 178 Ind. 503, 519 , 99 N.E. 102 (1912), our Supreme Court stated: ‘Since the enactment of the act of 1899, supra, a contract made in violation of the statute is void, and a claimant 352 cannot recover thereunder anything from the township, even though the contract on claimant’s part, has been fully executed.’ “We, therefore, hold that the Township Reform Act of 1899 completely bars Appellant’s recovery, under any theory, during that period of time when he was dealing with the Sugar Creek Township School of Boon 1975Bank, supra; Lee v. York School Tp. (1904), 163 Ind. 339 .’ “In Miller v. Jackson, 178 Ind. 503, 519 , 99 N.E. 102 (1912), our Supreme Court stated: ‘Since the enactment of the act of 1899, supra, a contract made in violation of the statute is void, and a claimant 352 cannot recover thereunder anything from the township, even though the contract on claimant’s part, has been fully executed.’ “We, therefore, hold that the Township Reform Act of 1899 completely bars Appellant’s recovery, under any theory, during that period of time when he was dealing with the Sugar Creek Township School of Boon	3	1970–1975
Lighty v. State green indctapp · 2000 1 sentence 2003And as we stated in Lighty, 727 N.E.2d at 1096 , "It is well settled that contracts made in violation of a statute are void and unenforceable." It follows that a plea agreement, like the agreement in Lighty and in this case, which requires the trial court, after a plea of guilty, to withhold judgment rather than enter judgment constitutes a contract made in violation of Indiana Code Section 35-88-1-l(a).	1	2003–2003
Noble v. Alis green indctapp · 1985 1 sentence 1986In Noble v. Alis (1985), Ind.App., 474 N.E.2d 109 , Judge Neal said Broadly speaking, the law is that a contract made in violation of a statute is void.	1	1986–1986
Lee v. York School Township green ind · 1904 1 sentence 1975Bank, supra; Lee v. York School Tp. (1904), 163 Ind. 339 .’ “In Miller v. Jackson, 178 Ind. 503, 519 , 99 N.E. 102 (1912), our Supreme Court stated: ‘Since the enactment of the act of 1899, supra, a contract made in violation of the statute is void, and a claimant *352 cannot recover thereunder anything from the township, even though the contract on claimant’s part, has been fully executed.’ “We, therefore, hold that the Township Reform Act of 1899 completely bars Appellant’s recovery, under any theory, during that period of time when he was dealing with the Sugar Creek Township School of Boon	1	1975–1975
Bright National Bank v. Hartman neutral indctapp · 1915 2 sentences 1941In the case of Bright National Bank v. Hartman (1916), reported in 61 Ind. App. 440, 448 , 109 N. E. 846 , and cited by appellant, this court said, “Where a statute fixes certain requirements as conditions precedent to the right to carry on a certain business, or to the performance of certain acts, and affixes a penalty for noncompliance therewith, the party who seeks to enforce a right dependent upon such law has the burden of showing compliance therewith and may not rely upon the presumption that the requirements of the law have been satisfied.” By this case and other cases cited by appellan 1941In the case of Bright National Bank v. Hartman (1916), reported in 61 Ind. App. 440, 448 , 109 N. E. 846 , and cited by appellant, this court said, “Where a statute fixes certain requirements as conditions precedent to the right to carry on a certain business, or to the performance of certain acts, and affixes a penalty for noncompliance therewith, the party who seeks to enforce a right dependent upon such law has the burden of showing compliance therewith and may not rely upon the presumption that the requirements of the law have been satisfied.” By this case and other cases cited by appellan	1	1941–1941
Mahar v. . Harrington Park Villa Sites green ny · 1912 2 sentences 1930Mahar v. Harrington Park Villa Sites (1912), 204 N. Y. 231 , 97 N. E. 587 , 38 L. 1930Mahar v. Harrington Park Villa Sites (1912), 204 N. Y. 231 , 97 N. E. 587 , 38 L.	1	1930–1930
Horning v. McGill neutral ind · 1917 2 sentences 1928Horning v. McGill 235 (1917), 188 Ind. 332 , 116 N. E. 303 ; Beecher v. Peru Trust Co. (1912), 49 Ind. App. 184 , 97 N. E. 23 ; Stein-Hall Mfg. 1928Horning v. McGill 235 (1917), 188 Ind. 332 , 116 N. E. 303 ; Beecher v. Peru Trust Co. (1912), 49 Ind. App. 184 , 97 N. E. 23 ; Stein-Hall Mfg.	1	1928–1928
Beecher v. Peru Trust Co. green indctapp · 1912 2 sentences 1928Horning v. McGill 235 (1917), 188 Ind. 332 , 116 N. E. 303 ; Beecher v. Peru Trust Co. (1912), 49 Ind. App. 184 , 97 N. E. 23 ; Stein-Hall Mfg. 1928Horning v. McGill 235 (1917), 188 Ind. 332 , 116 N. E. 303 ; Beecher v. Peru Trust Co. (1912), 49 Ind. App. 184 , 97 N. E. 23 ; Stein-Hall Mfg.	1	1928–1928
Rowley v. Fair neutral ind · 1885 1 sentence 1895Moreover, even as to the treasurer’s title to the money loaned, the holding in the case of Rowley v. Fair, supra, is to the effect that such title is rather technical than substantial, and is acknowledged only for the better security of the funds, and not for the use or benefit of the officer himself.	1	1895–1895
Brady v. . the Mayor, C., of the City of New York green ny · 1859 1 sentence 1871It was said by the court of appeals of New York, in the case of Brady v. The Mayor, etc., 20 N. Y. 312 , in speaking of the making of a contract for a street improvement, that “if this had been done, and if the result of all the offers had been taken into the account in selecting the lowest bidder, a contract given to that person would have been awarded according to the statute.” It was held by the court of appeals, in the case of Bonesteel v. The Mayor, etc., 22 N. Y. 162 , that “it does not require any argument to show that a contract made in violation of the requirements of the charter is n	1	1871–1871
Bonesteel v. . the Mayor, C., of New York neutral · 1860 1 sentence 1871It was said by the court of appeals of New York, in the case of Brady v. The Mayor, etc., 20 N. Y. 312 , in speaking of the making of a contract for a street improvement, that “if this had been done, and if the result of all the offers had been taken into the account in selecting the lowest bidder, a contract given to that person would have been awarded according to the statute.” It was held by the court of appeals, in the case of Bonesteel v. The Mayor, etc., 22 N. Y. 162 , that “it does not require any argument to show that a contract made in violation of the requirements of the charter is n	1	1871–1871

Statutes the citing opinions construe

IN § Ind. Code § 25-34.1-3-2 (3)

Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.

Where else courts name it

CA 38 (1912–2024) IN 32 (1871–2017) IL 26 (1886–2026) VA 24 (1851–2025) TX 21 (1925–2025) NY 20 (1899–2013) WI 14 (1893–1992) MO 14 (1899–2017) MA 11 (1839–2016) MI 10 (1917–2024) MD 7 (1916–2020) OK 7 (1916–2011) TN 7 (1911–2006) DC 7 (1956–2019) FL 6 (1906–2018) KS 6 (1907–2007) NC 5 (1918–2009) PA 5 (1926–2000) OH 4 (1930–1972) LA 4 (1967–2020) ID 4 (1927–2024) OR 4 (1877–1974) GA 4 (1942–2020) KY 3 (1917–2025) AL 3 (1885–1939) UT 3 (1899–2008) WA 2 (1914–1917) SD 2 (1907–1952) HI 2 (1942–1966) WV 2 (1903–1926) NV 2 (1927–1930) NM 2 (1938–1992)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check