Indiana Code
Ind. Code § 34-13-3-13 (2026)
Denial of claim as prerequisite to suit
✓ current as of May 2026
Sec. 13. A person may not initiate a suit against a governmental entity unless the person's claim has been denied in whole or in part.
[Pre-1998 Recodification Citation: 34-4-16.5-12.]
As added by P.L.1-1998, SEC.8.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 15
cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1998–2023 · leading case: Wright v. Elston, 701 N.E.2d 1227 (Ind. Ct. App. 1998).
Wright v. Elston, 701 N.E.2d 1227 (Ind. Ct. App. 1998). “5-12 (now codified at Indiana Code Section 34-13-3-13) provides that a person may not initiate a suit against a governmental entity unless his claim has been denied in whole or in part.”
Januchowski v. N. Indiana Commuter Transp. Dist., 905 N.E.2d 1041 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009). “Ind.Code § 34-13-3-13. We have held that Indiana's qualified consent to suit applies to FELA claims because FELA claims are tort claims.”
Alexander v. City of South Bend, 256 F. Supp. 2d 865 (N.D. Ind. 2003). “8 Under the ITCA, a claim against a political subdivision is barred unless notice is filed with: (1) the governing body of that political subdivision and (2) the Indiana political subdivision risk management commission within one hundred eighty days after the loss occurs. Ind.”
Stork v. McKinley, 444 F. App'x 920 (7th Cir. 2011). “See Ind.Code § 34-13-3-13; Watkins v. Kasper, 599 F.”
Edwards v. Faust, 407 F. App'x 948 (7th Cir. 2010). “2009), and inmates also have tort remedies in state court for unauthorized deprivations by prison employees, Ind.Code § 34-13-3-13; Smith v. Ind. Dep’t of Corr.”
Est. of Vandam v. Daniels, 278 F.R.D. 415 (S.D. Ind. 2011). “§ 34-13-3-13. One who files a notice of tort claim with the Attorney General must do so within the statutorily-set period of two hundred seventy (270) days after the triggering event.”
Hajduch v. Ivy Tech Cmty. Coll. (N.D. Ind. 2019). “However, the operative pleading in this matter is Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint, filed on October 14, 2019, which was not premature under Indiana Code § 34-13-3-13. The Court finds that “[t]he crucial consideration” which “is whether the notice supplied by the [Plaintiff] of…”
Billy J. Lemond v. Indiana Dep't of Corr., State of Indiana, & Westville Corr. Facility (mem. dec.) (Ind. Ct. App. 2019). “Indiana Code Section 34-13-3-13 provides that “[a] person may not initiate a suit against a governmental entity unless the person’s claim has been denied in whole or in part.”
Randy Chariton, on behalf of himself & all others similarly situated v. City of Hammond, Indiana Bd. of Pub. Works & Saf. (mem. dec.) (Ind. Ct. App. 2020). “8 The cases relied on by Chariton are inapposite because the claimants in those cases had timely filed notice of tort claims but had prematurely filed suit before the claims had been denied by the government entity or deemed denied as required pursuant to Indiana Code Section…”
Watson v. Indiana Dep't of Corr. (S.D. Ind. 2020). “2007) (citing I.C. § 34-13-3-13). Mr. Watson's response does not dispute that he failed to file a notice of tort claim.”
Griffin v. Knight (S.D. Ind. 2023). “Ind. Code § 34-13-3-13 . Defendants raised in their answer the affirmative defense of Griffin's failure to comply with the notice requirement.”
Raymond McNeil Love v. Mike Herron, Daryl Kent, Jerry Jones, & Pen Prods. Corr. Indus. (mem. dec.) (Ind. Ct. App. 2015). “” Ind. Code § 34-13-3-13 . 2 Although Love asserted only direct constitutional claims, the motion to dismiss further argued the defendants could not be held liable under 42 U.”
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.