Ind. Code » Title 27
Indiana Code

Ind. Code § 27-7-5-1 (2025)

Repealed

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

Formerly: Acts 1965, c.138, s.1; Acts 1969, c.124, s.1. Repealed by Acts 1982, P.L.166, SEC.6.

 

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 19 cases, 1974–2013 · leading case: United Farm Bureau Mut. Ins. v. Hanley, 360 N.E.2d 247 (Ind. Ct. App. 1977).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
United Farm Bureau Mut. Ins. v. Hanley, 360 N.E.2d 247 (Ind. Ct. App. 1977). · cites it 8× “Code Section 27-7-5-1 (1976)] came into being in 1965.”
United Nat'l Ins. v. DePrizio, 705 N.E.2d 455 (Ind. 1999). · cites it 2× “Ind.Code § 27-7-5-1 (originally enacted as Acts 1965, c.”
Scalf v. Globe Am. Cas. Co., 442 N.E.2d 8 (Ind. Ct. App. 1982). · cites it 3× “Ind. Code 27-7-5-1, in effect at the time of this accident, 4 provided in part: No automobile liability or motor vehicle liability policy or insurance insuring against loss resulting from liability imposed by law for bodily injury or death *10 suffered by any person arising out…”
Libdy v. Companion Ins. Co., 390 N.E.2d 1022 (Ind. Ct. App. 1979). · cites it 2× “Whether or not Ind.Code 27-7-5-1 requires that Liddy receive double uninsured motorist benefits.”
Anderson v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 471 N.E.2d 1170 (Ind. Ct. App. 1984). “The Indiana Uninsured Motorist Statute, to which she refers, allows for the inclusion of uninsured motorist coverage within policies, 4 "insuring against logs resulting from liability imposed by law for bodily injury or death suffered by any person arising out of the ownership,…”
Dravet v. Vernon Fire & Cas. Ins. Co., 454 N.E.2d 440 (Ind. Ct. App. 1983). · cites it 4× “Whether the provision requiring consent to settle a claim contravenes Ind. Code 27-7-5-1 (1976); 1 2. Whether Vernon waived its right to assert the policy exclusion; and 3.”
Gheae v. Founders Ins. Co., 854 N.E.2d 419 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006). “In particular, they argue that the trial court erred when it found that the Named Operator Exelusion did not violate the Uninsured Motorist Act, Indiana Code Sections 27-7-5-1 through -6 ("the Act").”
Pafco Gen. v. Providence Washington, 587 N.E.2d 728 (Ind. Ct. App. 1992). · cites it 2× “§ 27-7-6-2 regulates cancellations and nonrenewal of insurance policies and its definition of "insured" was irrelevant to determining the class of persons included in "insured" in I.C. § 27-7-5-1. The Vincel court's reasoning was that I.”
Ohio Cas. Ins. v. Herring-Jenkins, 830 F. Supp. 2d 566 (N.D. Ind. 2011). · cites it 2× “As originally enacted, Indiana Code § 27-7-5-1 mandated that insurance carriers offer uninsured motorist coverage in an amount equal to Indiana’s minimum financial responsibility requirements.”
Peele v. Gillespie, 658 N.E.2d 954 (Ind. Ct. App. 1995). “…§ 27-7-5-6(b) Prudential lost its right to subrogation. Record at 43. 2 . IND.CODE §§ 34-4-36-1 to 3. 3 . IND.CODE §§ 27-7-5-1 to 6.”
Indiana Ins. Co. v. Allis, 628 N.E.2d 1251 (Ind. Ct. App. 1994). “The Ely court analyzed the original Act and due to the absence of legislative history in our state, looked to the rationale supporting the passage of similar statutes in forty-five other states.”
Indiana Lumbermens Mut. Ins. Co. v. Vincel, 452 N.E.2d 418 (Ind. Ct. App. 1983). “* Ind.Code 27-7-5-1 (1976) (repealed) [hereinafter cited as the Statute].”
Show all 19 citing cases →
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.