Ind. Code » Title 25
Indiana Code

Ind. Code § 25-2.1-15-2 (2025)

Time for commencement of action

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

     Sec. 2. An action under this chapter must be commenced by the earlier of the following:

(1) One (1) year from the date the alleged act, omission, or neglect is discovered or should have been discovered by the exercise of reasonable diligence.

(2) Three (3) years after the service for which the suit is brought has been performed or the date of the initial issuance of the accountant's report on the financial statements or other information.

As added by P.L.30-1993, SEC.7.

 

IC 25-2.5ARTICLE 2.5. ACUPUNCTURISTS

 

           Ch. 1.Definitions
           Ch. 2.License and Qualifications
           Ch. 3.Unlawful Practice

 

IC 25-2.5-1Chapter 1. Definitions

 

           25-2.5-1-1Applicability of definitions
           25-2.5-1-2"Acupuncture"
           25-2.5-1-2.1"Acupuncturist"
           25-2.5-1-2.5"Agency"
           25-2.5-1-3"Board"
           25-2.5-1-4Repealed
           25-2.5-1-5"Practice of acupuncture"

 

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases, 2002–2015 · leading case: KPMG, Peat Marwick, LLP v. Carmel Fin. Corp., 784 N.E.2d 1057 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
KPMG, Peat Marwick, LLP v. Carmel Fin. Corp., 784 N.E.2d 1057 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 8× “Specifically, KPMG asserts here, as well as in its affirmative defenses to Carmel's complaint, that Carmel failed to file its claim within the statutory period provided in Ind.Code § 25-2.1-15-2, the accountant statute of limitations statute.”
Kapoor v. Dybwad, 49 N.E.3d 108 (Ind. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 8× “Whether the Accountant Statute of Limitations Bars the Judson Plaintiffs’ Negligence Claim Against Greenwalt [99] Greenwalt contends that Indiana Code section 25-2.1-15-2 bars the Judson *137 Plaintiffs’ negligence , claim against it.”
Crowe, Chizek, & Co. v. Oil Tech., Inc., 771 N.E.2d 1203 (Ind. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 8× “Ind.Code § 25-2.1-15-2. 2 . Oral argument was heard in this cause on June 18, 2002.”
Bambi's Roofing, Inc. v. Moriarty, 859 N.E.2d 347 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 3× “I.C. § 25-2.1-15-2. As our holding in KPMG emphasizes, this statute "provides clear direction as to when a claim accrues and the period within which that claim must be brought" by triggering upon discovery of the "act, omission or neglect" rather than discovery of a cause of…”
Heaton & Eadie Prof'l Servs. Corp. v. Corneal Consultants of Indiana, P.C., 841 N.E.2d 1181 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 2× “Ind.Code § 25-2.1-15-2. As our holding in KPMG emphasizes, this statute "provides clear direction as to when a claim acerues and the period within which that claim must be brought" by triggering upon discovery of the "act, omission or neglect" rather than discovery of a cause of…”
Walter Morgan v. Ann Fennimore, 429 F. App'x 606 (7th Cir. 2011). · cites it 2× “Ind.Code § 25-2.1-15-2; Ohio. Rev.Code § 2305.”
Seema Kapoor Shiv Kapoor Performance Support Consulting, LLC v. Steve Dybwad Cronin Ins. Servs., Inc., No. 49A04-1410-CT-492 (Ind. Ct. App. Dec. 15, 2015). · cites it 4× “Whether the Accountant Statute of Limitations Bars the Judson Plaintiffs’ Negligence Claim Against Greenwalt [99] Greenwalt contends that Indiana Code section 25-2.1-15-2 bars the Judson Plaintiffs’ negligence claim against it.”
Ind. Code § 25-2.1-15-2(1): 2 cases
Crowe, Chizek, & Co. v. Oil Tech., Inc., 771 N.E.2d 1203 (Ind. Ct. App. 2002). “Ind.Code § 25-2.1-15-2. 2 . Oral argument was heard in this cause on June 18, 2002.”
Bambi's Roofing, Inc. v. Moriarty, 859 N.E.2d 347 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006). “I.C. § 25-2.1-15-2. As our holding in KPMG emphasizes, this statute "provides clear direction as to when a claim accrues and the period within which that claim must be brought" by triggering upon discovery of the "act, omission or neglect" rather than discovery of a cause of…”
Ind. Code § 25-2.1-15-2(2): 1 case
Kapoor v. Dybwad, 49 N.E.3d 108 (Ind. Ct. App. 2015). “Whether the Accountant Statute of Limitations Bars the Judson Plaintiffs’ Negligence Claim Against Greenwalt [99] Greenwalt contends that Indiana Code section 25-2.1-15-2 bars the Judson *137 Plaintiffs’ negligence , claim against it.”
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.