Indiana Code

Ind. Code § 32-17-3-1 (2026)

Husband and wife purchase or lease of real estate; rights of survivor

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaInd. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Sec. 1. (a) This section applies to a written contract in which a husband and wife:

(1) purchase real estate; or

(2) lease real estate with an option to purchase.

(b) Except as provided in subsection (d), a contract described in subsection (a) creates an estate by the entireties in the husband and wife. The interest of neither party is severable during the marriage.

(c) Upon the death of either party to the marriage, the survivor is considered to have owned the whole of all rights under the contract from its inception.

(d) If:

(1) a contract described in subsection (a) expressly creates a tenancy in common; or

(2) it appears from the tenor of a contract described in subsection (a) that the contract was intended to create a tenancy in common;

the contract shall be construed to create a tenancy in common.

[Pre-2002 Recodification Citation: 32-4-2-1.]

As added by P.L.2-2002, SEC.2.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 8 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2008–2024 · leading case: Cheryl L. Underwood v. Thomas Bunger, in his capacity as the Pers. Rep. of The Est. of Kenneth K. Kinney .

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Cheryl L. Underwood v. Thomas Bunger, in his capacity as the Pers. Rep. of The Est. of Kenneth K. Kinney (Ind. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 6× “Id,; see also- Ind.Code § 32-17-3-1 (2002) (“Upon the death of either party to the marriage, the survivor 'is considered to have owned the whole of all rights under the contract from its inception.”

Cheryl L. Underwood v. Thomas Bunger, in his capacity as the Pers. Rep. of the Est. of Kenneth K. Kinney (Ind. 2017). “§ 32-17-3-1(b). But the statute’s general rule is subject to an exception.”

House v. First Am. Title Co. (Ind. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 2× “A husband and wife are presumed to hold real property as tenants by the entireties, Ind.Code § 32-17-3-1, but that fact has not been established at this stage of the proceedings, and it cannot be resolved against House.”

Krudy v. Simpson (In re Simpson) (Bankr. S.D. Ind. 2012). · cites it 2× “§ 522 (b)(3); Ind.Code §§ 32-17-3-1 and 34-55-10-2(c)(5).”

Grdinich v. Plan Comm'n for the Town of Hebron Indiana (N.D. Ind. 2020). · cites it 2× “By default, the purchase of real estate by a married couple “creates an estate by the entireties in the husband and wife.”

Est. of Lewis G. Mark, & Evelyn J. Mark v. 1st Source Bank (Ind. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 2× “After 1st 1 While we presume the Marks owned the real property as tenants by the entireties, see Ind. Code § 32-17-3-1 , nothing in the record affirmatively establishes this fact.”

Princeton Alt. Income Fund LP v. Wolfe (N.D. Ind. 2022). “Code § 32-17-3-1 (d). Defendants argue that, as drafted, the Complaint must be dismissed, because Plaintiff has not alleged the facts necessary to overcome the presumption of the creation of an estate by the entireties.”

Princeton Alt. Income Fund LP v. Wolfe (N.D. Ind. 2024). “Code § 32-17-3-1 (d). Plaintiff argues that there is a question of fact as to whether Raviv was domiciled in Indiana at the time of the transfer of his interest in Vernon Woods Property to Katherine.”

— Ind. Code § 32-17-3-1(b) — 1 case

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.