Indiana Code

Ind. Code § 31-11-10-2 (2026)

Action by victim of fraud; defense

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaInd. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

     Sec. 2. (a) This section applies to a marriage that is voidable under IC 31-11-9-3 on the ground that the marriage was brought about through fraud on the part of one (1) of the parties to the marriage.

     (b) The alleged victim of fraud described in subsection (a) may file an action to annul the marriage in a court that has jurisdiction over the action under section 3 of this chapter.

     (c) It is a defense in an action brought under this section that, after the discovery of the alleged fraud, the alleged victim continued to cohabit with the other party to the marriage.

[Pre-1997 Recodification Citation: 31-7-7-2(a) part, (b).]

As added by P.L.1-1997, SEC.3.

 

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 2000–2012 · leading case: Marley v. State, 747 N.E.2d 1123 (Ind. 2001).
Marley v. State, 747 N.E.2d 1123 (Ind. 2001). · cites it 2× “See Ind.Code § 31-11-10-2; Id. § 831-16-14-1; Graves v.”
Marley v. State, 729 N.E.2d 1011 (Ind. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 3× “CODE § 31-11-10-2 (governing marriages which are voidable on the ground that it was brought about through fraud; "[i]t is a defense in an action brought under this section that, after the discovery of the alleged fraud, the alleged victim continued to cohabit with the other…”
Ramezan Hajizadeh v. Jo Hajizadeh a/k/a Jo Owens (Ind. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 2× “Ind. Code § 31-11-10-2 (2008). Here, neither Husband nor Wife sought an annulment of the marriage, so the issue of marital fraud under Indiana law is irrelevant here.”
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.