Sec. 5. (a) Every employer who is bound by the
compensation provisions of IC 22-3-2 through IC 22-3-6, except the
state, counties, townships, cities, towns, school cities, school towns,
other municipal corporations, state institutions, state boards, state
commissions, banks, trust companies, and building and loan
associations, shall insure the payment of compensation to the
employer's employees and their dependents in the manner provided in
IC 22-3-3, or procure from the worker's compensation board a
certificate authorizing the employer to carry such risk without
insurance. While such insurance or such certificate remains in force,
the employer or those conducting the employer's business and the
employer's worker's compensation insurance carrier shall be liable to
any employee and the employee's dependents for personal injury or
death by accident arising out of and in the course of employment only
to the extent and in the manner specified in IC 22-3-2 through IC 22-3-6.
(b) The state may not purchase worker's compensation insurance.
The state may establish a program of self-insurance to cover its liability
under this article. The state may administer its program of
self-insurance or may contract with any private agency, business firm,
limited liability company, or corporation to administer any part of the
program. The state department of insurance may, in the manner
prescribed by IC 4-22-2, adopt the rules necessary to implement the
state's program of self-insurance.
Formerly: Acts 1929, c.172, s.5; Acts 1961, c.187, s.1; Acts
1974, P.L.108, SEC.3. As amended by P.L.28-1983, SEC.56;
P.L.28-1988, SEC.22; P.L.8-1993, SEC.279; P.L.233-2015,
SEC.319.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
12
cases (
2 in the last 5 years), 1980–2022 · leading case:
K-Mart Corp. v. Novak, 521 N.E.2d 1346 (Ind. Ct. App. 1988).
K-Mart Corp. v. Novak, 521 N.E.2d 1346 (Ind. Ct. App. 1988).
· cites it 4× “Ind. Code § 22-3-2-5 ; Evans v. Yankeetown Dock Corp.”
Jackson v. Gibson, 409 N.E.2d 1236 (Ind. Ct. App. 1980).
· cites it 3× “In creating this exception the Legislature clearly limited the possibility of bringing suit against persons to those other than the employer or fellow employees. Each employer who is bound by the compensation provisions of the Act is required to carry insurance to insure payment…”
A.I. Credit Corp. v. Legion Ins. Co., 265 F.3d 630 (7th Cir. 2001).
“Credit with an effective collection mechanism: Indiana law requires companies like Mo-non to carry workers’ compensation insurance, see Ind.Code § 22-3-2-5(a); cancellation of the necessary policy could force Monon to cease operations.”
In Re Kemper Ins. Companies, 819 N.E.2d 485 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004).
· cites it 6× “Ind.Code §§ 22-3-2-5, 22-3-5-1. With respect to bonds taken pursuant to statute, i.”
Verma v. D.T. Carpentry, LLC, 805 N.E.2d 430 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004).
· cites it 2× “If a borrowed employee's injury occurred by accident and arose out of and in the course of employment with either the general or special employer, he is entitled to worker's compensation benefits, and Indiana Code section 22-3-2-5 operates to bar a court from hearing any common…”
Clemans v. Wishard Mem'l Hosp., 727 N.E.2d 1084 (Ind. Ct. App. 2000).
“Discussion and Decision The Act provides compensation for employees who suffer injuries that occur “by accident arising out of and in the course of their employment.”
J&B West Enter. v. Am. Interstate Ins. Co. (N.D. Ind. 2021).
· cites it 7× “The Policy merely ensures that American Interstate is compensated for assuming J&B West’s risk of secondary liability under Ind. Code § 22-3-2-5 . J&B West does not dispute that American Interstate assumed that liability under the Policy as evidenced 5 J&B West’s request for…”
Johal v. Fedex Corp. (S.D. Ind. 2022).
· cites it 2× “2003); Ind. Code § 22-3-2-5 . Indiana courts apply a three-element test: the injury must have been (1) "by accident" (2) "arising out of employment" and (3) "in the course of employment.”
— Ind. Code § 22-3-2-5(a) — 4 cases
A.I. Credit Corp. v. Legion Ins. Co., 265 F.3d 630 (7th Cir. 2001).
“Credit with an effective collection mechanism: Indiana law requires companies like Mo-non to carry workers’ compensation insurance, see Ind.Code § 22-3-2-5(a); cancellation of the necessary policy could force Monon to cease operations.”
In Re Kemper Ins. Companies, 819 N.E.2d 485 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004).
“Ind.Code §§ 22-3-2-5, 22-3-5-1. With respect to bonds taken pursuant to statute, i.”
J&B West Enter. v. Am. Interstate Ins. Co. (N.D. Ind. 2021).
“The Policy merely ensures that American Interstate is compensated for assuming J&B West’s risk of secondary liability under Ind. Code § 22-3-2-5 . J&B West does not dispute that American Interstate assumed that liability under the Policy as evidenced 5 J&B West’s request for…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.