legislative acquiescence doctrine in Indiana

2008Legislative Acquiescence A court will apply the doctrine of legislative acquiescence when: 1) there is a longstanding administrative interpretation of ambiguous statutory language 2) to which the legislature is presumed to have acquiesced because it has not made a subsequent change to that statutory lan *743 guage. 5 See Indiana State Bd. of Tax Comm’rs v. Fraternal Order of Eagles, Lodge No. 255, 521 N.E.2d 678, 679-81 (Ind.1988) (footnote added).

1991This Court assessed the legal doctrine of legislative acquiescence in State Bd. of Tax Comm'rs v. Fraternal Order of Eagles, Lodge No. 255 (1988), Ind., 521 N.E.2d 678 {Shepard, C.J., and Dickson, J., dissenting without opinion), and found that legislative silence or inaction in the face of longstanding administrative or judicial acceptance of an interpretation of a particular statutory provision is deemed by a decisionmaker la *1250 ter called upon to construe and apply such statutory provision to be legislative ratification of the longstanding administrative or judicial interpretation, tanta

2014It is a rule of statutory construction that “‘a long adhered to administrative interpretation dating from the legislative enactment, with no subsequent change having been made in the statute involved, raises a presumption of legislative acquiescence which is strongly persuasive upon the courts.’” Shepherd, 733 N.E.2d at 990 (citing Mance, 652 N.E.2d at 538 (quoting Ind. Dep’t of Revenue v. Glendale-Glenbrook Assocs., 429 N.E.2d 217, 219 (Ind. 1981))).

2014It is a rule of statutory construction that "'a long adhered to administrative interpretation dating from the legislative enactment, with no subsequent change having been made in the statute involved, raises a presumption of legislative acquiescence which is strongly persuasive upon the courts'" Shepherd, 733 N.E.2d at 990 (citing Mance, 652 N.E.2d at 538 (quoting Ind. Dep't of Revenue v. Glendale-Glenbrook Assocs., 429 N.E.2d 217, 219 (Ind.1981))).

2026State v. S.T., 82 N.E.3d 257, 261 (Ind. 2017) (“[W]e stress again that the hierarchy of interpretive principles moots the concept of legislative acquiescence—the clear statutory language makes it unnecessary to resort to other statutory construction rules.” (quoting Jackson v. State, 50 N.E.3d 767, 775 (Ind. 2016))) (alteration in original), as modified.

2026State v. S.T., 82 N.E.3d 257, 261 (Ind. 2017) (“[W]e stress again that the hierarchy of interpretive principles moots the concept of legislative acquiescence—the clear statutory language makes it unnecessary to resort to other statutory construction rules.” (quoting Jackson v. State, 50 N.E.3d 767, 775 (Ind. 2016))) (alteration in original), as modified.

2023See Layman v. State, 42 N.E.3d 972, 978 (Ind. 2015) (discussing the doctrine of legislative acquiescence). [25] Rather, Indiana law prefers to focus on the defendant’s conduct—and this policy preference makes sense.

2020See, e.g., DePuy, Inc. v. Farmer, 847 N.E.2d 160, 168 (Ind. 2006) (discussing the doctrine of legislative acquiescence). [63] Pursuant to the UCC as set forth in Indiana Code Section 26-1-2-313(1), Express warranties by the seller are created as follows: (a) any affirmation of fact or promise made by the seller to the buyer which relates to the goods and becomes part of the basis of the bargain creates an express warranty that the goods shall conform to the affirmation or promise. (b) any description of the goods which is made part of the basis of the bargain creates an express warranty that t

2016See Butler Univ. v. State Bd. of Tax Comm’rs, 408 N.E.2d 1286, 1287-91 (Ind.Ct.App.1980) (finding legislative acquiescence to a conclusion reached by the Indiana Attorney General in an advisory opinion forty-nine years previously); Frame v. South Bend Comm. Sch.

2016In addition, ESPN also disputes the trial court’s conclusion that, regardless of APRA’s definition of “public agency,” the doctrine of legislative acquiescence barred ESPN’s claim. [18] We review a trial court’s ruling on a T.R. 12(C) motion for judgment on the pleadings de novo, Davis v. Edgewater Sys. for Balanced Living, Inc., 42 N.E.3d 524, 526 (Ind.Ct.App.2015).

2015See Bailey v. State, 979 N.E.2d 133, 141 (Ind. 2012).

2014It is a rule of statutory construction that “‘a long adhered to administrative interpretation dating from the legislative enactment, with no subsequent change having been made in the statute involved, raises a presumption of legislative acquiescence which is strongly persuasive upon the courts.’” Shepherd, 733 N.E.2d at 990 (citing Mance, 652 N.E.2d at 538 (quoting Ind. Dep’t of Revenue v. Glendale-Glenbrook Assocs., 429 N.E.2d 217, 219 (Ind. 1981))).

2014It is a rule of statutory construction that "'a long adhered to administrative interpretation dating from the legislative enactment, with no subsequent change having been made in the statute involved, raises a presumption of legislative acquiescence which is strongly persuasive upon the courts'" Shepherd, 733 N.E.2d at 990 (citing Mance, 652 N.E.2d at 538 (quoting Ind. Dep't of Revenue v. Glendale-Glenbrook Assocs., 429 N.E.2d 217, 219 (Ind.1981))).