Ind. Code » Title 22
Indiana Code

Ind. Code § 22-6-1-1 (2025)

Jurisdiction; public policy

✓ 2025 Indiana Code: the 2026 session is not included
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaInd. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

     Sec. 1. No court of the state of Indiana, as defined in this chapter, shall have jurisdiction to issue any restraining order or temporary or permanent injunction in a case involving or growing out of a labor dispute, except in a strict conformity with the provisions of this chapter; nor shall any such restraining order or temporary or permanent injunction be issued contrary to the public policy declared in this chapter.

Formerly: Acts 1933, c.12, s.1. As amended by P.L.144-1986, SEC.157.

 

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9 cases, 1982–2014 · leading case: Pompey v. Pryner, 668 N.E.2d 1243 (Ind. Ct. App. 1996).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Pompey v. Pryner, 668 N.E.2d 1243 (Ind. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 5× “Ind.Code Ann. § 22-6-1-1 et seq. (West 1991).”
Gordon v. Gordon, 733 N.E.2d 468 (Ind. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 4× “Code § 22-6-1-12 and that no Indiana trial court has jurisdiction over this type of dispute absent compliance with Ind.Code § 22-6-1-1 et seq. (the “Anti-Injunction Act”).”
United Steelworkers v. N. Indiana Pub. Serv. Co., 436 N.E.2d 826 (Ind. Ct. App. 1982). · cites it 4× “The Court finds that a labor dispute as contemplated by Indiana Code 22-6-1-1 et seq., exists between the Plaintiff Unions and the Defendant Northern Indiana Public Service Company.”
City of Valparaiso v. Iron Workers Local Union 395, 669 F. Supp. 912 (N.D. Ind. 1987). · cites it 2× “1982) (stating that the federal Norris LaGuardia Act is identical to Indiana’s Anti-Injunction Act, I.C. §§ 22-6-1-1 et seq., and that federal judicial decisions are “valuable aid[sj” in construing Indiana’s law).”
Int'l Union of Operating Engineers v. Beck, 669 N.E.2d 441 (Ind. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 2× “CODE § 22-6-1-1 (1993 Ed.), et seq. (Anti-Injunction Act) should govern the proceedings.”
Anderson v. Wolford, 604 N.E.2d 659 (Ind. Ct. App. 1992). · cites it 4× “See IC § 22-6-1-1 to -12 (1988 & 1992 Supp.).”
Nordman v. North Manchester Foundry, Inc., 810 N.E.2d 1071 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 3× “However, Nordman maintains, because of Indiana's Anti-Injunetion Act, Ind.Code § 22-6-1-1 et seq., the trial court did not have jurisdiction to issue an injunetion because this is a case "involving or growing out of a labor dispute.”
Merit Steel Co. v. Int'l Ass'n of Bridge, 684 F. Supp. 1007 (N.D. Ind. 1988). “BACKGROUND On March 9, 1988, Merit filed a Verified Complaint For Temporary Restraining Order, Preliminary Injunction, and Permanent Injunction in Porter Superior Court seeking relief pursuant to Indiana Code 22-6-1-1 et seq. against the above-captioned defendants (Hereafter…”
A.H. v. C.E.G., 13 N.E.3d 470 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 2× “Ind.Code § 22-6-1-1. The AIA provides a public policy statement as an aid to the interpretation of the act.”
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.