Indiana Code

Ind. Code § 34-11-2-11 (2026)

Written contract actions

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

     Sec. 11. (a) Except as provided in subsection (b), an action upon contracts in writing other than those for the payment of money, and including all mortgages other than chattel mortgages, deeds of trust, judgments of courts of record, and for the recovery of the possession of real estate, must be commenced within ten (10) years after the cause of action accrues. However, an action upon contracts in writing other than those for the payment of money entered into before September 1, 1982, not including chattel mortgages, deeds of trust, judgments of courts of record, or for the recovery of the possession of real estate, must be commenced within twenty (20) years after the cause of action accrues.

     (b) This subsection applies to an action:

(1) for the recovery of the possession of real estate;

(2) that involves or is affected by a line located and established by a professional surveyor under IC 36-2-12-10; and

(3) that accrues before the lines are located and established as described in subdivision (2).

An action to which this subsection applies must be commenced before the expiration of the appeal period set forth in IC 36-2-12-14.

[Pre-1998 Recodification Citation: 34-1-2-2(6).]

As added by P.L.1-1998, SEC.6. Amended by P.L.14-2000, SEC.69; P.L.99-2023, SEC.1.

 

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 83 cases (11 in the last 5 years), 1998–2026 · leading case: Lewis v. Rex Metal Craft, Inc., 831 N.E.2d 812 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005).
Lewis v. Rex Metal Craft, Inc., 831 N.E.2d 812 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 18× “Code § 34-11-2-10 (action to enforce child support obligation "must be commenced" not later than ten years after eighteenth birthday or emancipation); Ind.Code § 34-11-2-11 (action upon written contracts other than those for payment of money "must be commenced within" ten or…”
Meisenhelder v. Zipp Express, Inc., 788 N.E.2d 924 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 8× “Indiana Code § 34-11-2-11 (Burns Code Ed.”
Perryman v. Motorist Mut. Ins. Co., 846 N.E.2d 683 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 6× “denied, expanded to all tort cases and, in turn, applied to actions for breach of contract under I.C. § 34-11-2-11 by Meisenhelder, 788 N.”
State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Riddell Nat'l Bank, 984 N.E.2d 655 (Ind. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 10× “Concluding the parties’ policy does not create a two-year statute of limitations, and thus the ten year statute of limitations provided in Indiana Code section 34-11-2-11 applies, we affirm. Facts and Procedural History Riddell was the mortgagee of a property in Parke County,…”
Hoose v. Doody, 886 N.E.2d 83 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 8× “In addition, Indiana Code Section 32-21-7-1 requires the claimant or adverse possessor to pay and discharge "all taxes and special assessments that the adverse possessor or claimant reasonably believes in good faith to be due on the land or real estate during the period the…”
Chad Folkening, DSL.Com, Inc. & eCorp v. Megan Van Petten n/k/a Megan Van Petten Walton, 22 N.E.3d 818 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 26× “I would reverse the trial court’s judgment as it erroneously characterized the Agreement falling within the purview of I.C. § 34-11-2-11. 12”
Bambi's Roofing, Inc. v. Moriarty, 859 N.E.2d 347 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 5× “Perryman's discussion focuses on the statute of limitations applicable to an action based upon an insurance contract, I.C. § 34-11-2-11, which differs from the statute of limitations applicable in this case.”
Hendrickson v. Alcoa Fuels, Inc., 735 N.E.2d 804 (Ind. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 10× “” Ind.Code § 34-11-2-11 4 (formerly Ind.Code § 34-1-2-2(6)).”
City of East Chicago v. East Chicago Second Century, Inc., 908 N.E.2d 611 (Ind. 2009). · cites it 4× “Cross-Appeal on Count IX The trial court determined that Count IX, labeled "Breach of Contract," is a claim subject to a ten-year limitation under Ind.Code § 34-11-2-11 (2008) and held that dismissing this claim against Second Century would be inappropriate.”
City of East Chicago v. East Chicago Second Century, Inc., 878 N.E.2d 358 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 8× “See Ind.Code § 34-11-2-11 ("An action upon contracts in writing other than those for the payment of money .”
Altevogt v. Brand, 963 N.E.2d 1146 (Ind. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 4× “2008) (citing Ind.Code § 34-11-2-11). And they must be established by clear and convincing evidence.”
V. Ganz Builders & Dev. Co., Inc., & Vladimir Ganz v. Pioneer Lumber, Inc., 59 N.E.3d 1025 (Ind. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 4× “See Ind.Code § 34-11-2-11 ("An action upon contracts in writing other than those for the payment of money, and including all mortgages other than chattel mortgages, deeds of trust, judgments of courts of record, and for the recovery of the possession of real estate, must be…”
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.