Ind. Code » Title 33
Indiana Code

Ind. Code § 33-23-6-2 (2025)

Alternative dispute resolution fund; establishment; purpose; considerations

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

     Sec. 2. (a) In each county participating in the program under this chapter, there is established an alternative dispute resolution fund for each of the following:

(1) The circuit court.

(2) The superior court.

(3) The probate court established by IC 33-31-1.

     (b) Notwithstanding subsection (a), if more than one (1) court exercises jurisdiction over domestic relations and paternity cases in a county, one (1) alternative dispute resolution fund may be established to be used by all the courts to implement this chapter if:

(1) the:

(A) county auditor; and

(B) judge of each court that exercises jurisdiction over domestic relations and paternity cases in the county;

agree to establish one (1) fund; and

(2) the agreement to establish the fund is included in the plan adopted by the county under section 3 of this chapter.

     (c) The sources of money for each fund established under subsection (a) or (b) are:

(1) the alternative dispute resolution fee collected under section 1 of this chapter for the circuit court, superior court, or probate court, respectively; and

(2) copayments collected under subsection (d) if:

(A) a county chooses to deposit the copayments into the fund; and

(B) the county specifies in the plan adopted by the county under section 3 of this chapter that the copayments will be deposited in the fund.

     (d) The funds shall be used to foster domestic relations alternative dispute resolution, including:

(1) mediation;

(2) reconciliation;

(3) nonbinding arbitration;

(4) parental counseling; and

(5) guardian ad litem services.

Litigants referred by the court to services covered by the fund shall make a copayment for the services in an amount determined by the court based on the litigants' ability to pay. The fund shall be administered by the circuit, superior, or probate court that exercises jurisdiction over domestic relations and paternity cases in the county. A fund used by multiple courts under subsection (b) shall be administered jointly by all the courts using the fund. Money in each fund at the end of a fiscal year does not revert to the county general fund but remains in the fund for the uses specified in this section.

     (e) Each circuit, superior, or probate court that administers an alternative dispute resolution fund shall ensure that money in the fund is disbursed in a manner that primarily benefits those litigants who have the least ability to pay, in accordance with the plan adopted by the county under section 3 of this chapter.

     (f) If a party is currently charged with or has been convicted of a crime under IC 35-42, the court must make a determination that participation in services provided by this fund does not pose an unreasonable risk of harm to any party.

[Pre-2004 Recodification Citation: 33-4-13-2.]

As added by P.L.98-2004, SEC.2. Amended by P.L.55-2005, SEC.1; P.L.142-2020, SEC.51; P.L.151-2023, SEC.3.

 

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 2012–2017 · leading case: Darryl Calvin v. State of Indiana, 87 N.E.3d 474 (Ind. 2017).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Darryl Calvin v. State of Indiana, 87 N.E.3d 474 (Ind. 2017). · cites it 4× “§ 31-19-9-8(a) (2017) (exceptions to parental consent for adoption); I.C. § 33-23-6-2(f) (2017) (ineligibility for mediation); I.”
King v. Marion Circuit Court, 868 F.3d 589 (7th Cir. 2017). “See Ind. Code § 33-23-6-2 . Marion County has such a program, which it calls the Marion County Domestic Relations Alternative Dispute Resolution Plan.”
Kurt Gregory v. Carol Gregory, No. 02A04-1105-DR-256 (Ind. Ct. App. Jan. 9, 2012). · cites it 8× “Ind. Code § 33-23-6-2 (d). Kurt contends that under this statute, the trial court erred in entering an open- ended order for the parties to pay for the cost of the “Always a Parent” program without determining their ability to pay for it and assessing a set copayment for the…”
Ind. Code § 33-23-6-2(f): 1 case
Darryl Calvin v. State of Indiana, 87 N.E.3d 474 (Ind. 2017). “§ 31-19-9-8(a) (2017) (exceptions to parental consent for adoption); I.C. § 33-23-6-2(f) (2017) (ineligibility for mediation); I.”
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.