Indiana Code
Ind. Code § 22-5-3-2 (2026)
Railroads; damages; exemplary damages
✓ current as of May 2026
Sec. 2. If any railway company or any other company, partnership, limited liability company, or corporation in this state shall authorize, allow or permit any of its or their agents to black-list any discharged employees, or attempt by words or writing, or any other means whatever, to prevent such discharged employee, or any employee who may have voluntarily left said company's service, from obtaining employment with any other person, or company, said company shall be liable to such employee in such sum as will fully compensate him, to which may be added exemplary damages.
Formerly: Acts 1889, c.166, s.2; Acts 1895, c.110, s.1. As amended by P.L.8-1993, SEC.289.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 15
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1998–2021 · leading case: Loparex, LLC v. MPI Release Tech., LLC, 964 N.E.2d 806 (Ind. 2012).
Loparex, LLC v. MPI Release Tech., LLC, 964 N.E.2d 806 (Ind. 2012). “Ind.Code § 22-5-3-2 (2007). Like other states’ blacklisting statutes, Indiana’s was enacted around the turn of the twentieth century.”
Burk v. Heritage Food Serv. Equip., Inc., 737 N.E.2d 803 (Ind. Ct. App. 2000). “Specifically, Burk contends that the trial court misinterpreted Ind.Code § 22-5-3-2 (the Blacklisting statute) to apply only to employees who are involuntarily discharged.”
Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc. v. Lockhart, 5 F. Supp. 2d 667 (S.D. Ind. 1998). “In relevant part that statute, Ind.Code § 22-5-3-2, prohibits an employer from attempting “by words or writing, or any other means whatever, to prevent” a former employee “from obtaining employment with any other person.”
Baker v. Tremco Inc., 890 N.E.2d 73 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008). “m that it had violated Indiana's "blacklisting" statute, which provides as follows: If any railway company or any other company, partnership, limited liability company, or corporation in this state shall authorize, allow or permit any of its or their agents to black-list any…”
Sch. City of Hammond Dist. v. Chad Rueth, 71 N.E.3d 33 (Ind. Ct. App. 2017). “The relevant portion of the blacklisting statute, Indiana Code section 22-5-3-2, “create[s] a cause of action for damages resulting from a former employer engaging in blacklisting” and provides as follows: If any .”
Cortezano v. Salin Bank & Trust Co., 680 F.3d 936 (7th Cir. 2012). “” Ind.Code § 22-5-3-2. After discovery, Kristi has managed to find only one piece of evidence in support of these claims: an email containing an excerpt of the minutes from the June 4, 2008, Fraud Financial Network meeting.”
Eitler v. St. Joseph Reg'l Med. Ctr. South-Bend Campus, Inc., 789 N.E.2d 497 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003). “[4] *504 The majority goes further and holds that the absolute privilege conferred by the authorization/release is all-encompassing and includes the "right" of a former employer in providing information to a prospective employer, to attempt to prevent the former employee from…”
Butts v. Oce-USA, Inc., 9 F. Supp. 2d 1007 (S.D. Ind. 1998). “(Plaintiff’s Memorandum in Support of Submission of Supplemental Authority at 2.”
Kentner v. Timothy R. Downey Ins., Inc., 430 F. Supp. 2d 839 (S.D. Ind. 2006). “Plaintiffs Claim Under Indiana Code § 22-5-3-2 Defendant also argues that Plaintiffs claim under Indiana Code § 22-5-3-2 fails because he has presented no evidence that Downey, by sending out the letters, was attempting to prevent him from obtaining employment with any of the…”
Brazauskas v. Fort Wayne-South Bend Diocese, Inc., 755 N.E.2d 201 (Ind. Ct. App. 2001). “" Furthermore, Ind.Code § 22-5-3-2 provides: If any railway company or any other company, partnership, limited lability company, or corporation in this state shall authorize, allow or permit any of its or their agents to black-list any discharged employees, or attempt by words…”
John Crouch v. State of Indiana, Britni Saunders (Ind. Ct. App. 2020). “[19] Ind. Code § 22-5-3-2 is titled “Railroads; damages; exemplary damages” and provides: If any railway company or any other company, partnership, limited liability company, or corporation in this state shall authorize, allow or permit any of its or their agents to black-list…”
Pamela Bowling v. State of Indiana, Britni Saunders (Ind. Ct. App. 2020). “She also asserts that the court erred by dismissing her claims under Ind. Code § 22-5-3-2 . [6] In today’s companion case, Crouch v.”
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.