Indiana Code
Ind. Code § 34-13-8-3 (2026)
"Supplemental fund"
✓ current as of May 2026
Sec. 3. As used in this chapter, "supplemental fund" refers to the supplemental state fair relief fund established by section 9 of this chapter.
As added by P.L.160-2012, SEC.62.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 13
cases, 2000–2015 · leading case: Cody Waldrip v. Angela Waldrip, City of Bloomington, Indiana, Monroe Cnty., Indiana, State of Indiana, 976 N.E.2d 102 (Ind. Ct. App. 2012).
Cody Waldrip v. Angela Waldrip, City of Bloomington, Indiana, Monroe Cnty., Indiana, State of Indiana, 976 N.E.2d 102 (Ind. Ct. App. 2012). “In her motion to dismiss, Angela argued that she was immune from all liability under ITCA pursuant to Indiana Code Section 34-13-8-3(6), which provides that a “governmental .”
Simpson v. Op Prop. Mgmt., LLC, 939 N.E.2d 1098 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010). “~ However, in Dahms, we called into doubt whether Indiana Code Section 34-13-8-3(3) could ever be applied in a scenario where the government employee or entity being sued is not charged with the responsibility of keeping a roadway clear.”
City of Indianapolis v. DUFFITT, 929 N.E.2d 231 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010). “; see Ind.Code § 34-13-8-3(7) (providing immunity for governmental entities or employees performing a discretionary function (emphasis supplied)); But see Scott v.”
Noble Cnty. v. Rogers, 745 N.E.2d 194 (Ind. 2001). “§ 34-13-8-3(5) & (6). Indiana Trial Rule 65(C), which requires a party seeking a preliminary injunction to post a bond, exempts a "governmental organization" from that requirement but provides that "such governmental organization shall be responsible for costs and damages.”
Dzierba v. City of Michigan City, 798 N.E.2d 463 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003). “In that case, the court held that, under IC. § 34-13-8-3(1), the City of Michigan City was immune from liability for the drowning death.”
Bartholomew Cnty. v. Johnson, 995 N.E.2d 666 (Ind. Ct. App. 2013). “That being said, we agree with Shand Mining and Reuhl to the extent they hold that a governmental entity is not entitled to immunity pursuant to Indiana Code Section 34-13-8-3(10) if a loss results from its own negligence, that is, if a loss results from an act for which it “can…”
Turner v. Sheriff of Marion Cnty., 94 F. Supp. 2d 966 (S.D. Ind. 2000). “Actions for false arrest and false imprisonment are specifically excluded from the Tort Claims Act’s “enforcement of a law” immunity, I.C. § 34-13-8-3(7), and we found in our summary judgment ruling that no other immunities apply.”
Wilson v. Isaacs, 917 N.E.2d 1251 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009). “1999) (citing Ind.Code § 34-13-8-3), trans. denied (2000).”
In re: Indiana State Fair Litig.: Polet v. Mid-Am. Sound, 28 N.E.3d 333 (Ind. Ct. App. 2015). “See Ind. Code § 34-13-8-3 . Not the Governor, the Attorney General, or any other employee of the State had the power to consent to state liability above the limits of the ITCA.”
Patrick v. Miresso, 821 N.E.2d 856 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005). “Appellants contend that they are immune from liability under Indiana Code Section 34-13-8-3(8), which provides that "[a] government entity or an employee acting within the scope of the employee's employment is not liable if a loss results from .”
PNC Bank, Indiana v. State, 750 N.E.2d 444 (Ind. Ct. App. 2001). “Indiana Code section 34-13-8-3(6) provides that a governmental entity is not liable for loss resulting from "the performance of a discretionary function.”
Putnam Cnty. Sheriff v. Price, 930 N.E.2d 669 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010). “We note the Sheriffs motion to dismiss also raised the issue of immunity because of a temporary condition caused by weather pursuant to Indiana Code section 34-13-8-3(8). In Walton v. Ramp, 407 N.”
Ind. Code § 34-13-8-3(1): 1 case
Dzierba v. City of Michigan City, 798 N.E.2d 463 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003). “In that case, the court held that, under IC. § 34-13-8-3(1), the City of Michigan City was immune from liability for the drowning death.”
Ind. Code § 34-13-8-3(10): 1 case
Bartholomew Cnty. v. Johnson, 995 N.E.2d 666 (Ind. Ct. App. 2013). “That being said, we agree with Shand Mining and Reuhl to the extent they hold that a governmental entity is not entitled to immunity pursuant to Indiana Code Section 34-13-8-3(10) if a loss results from its own negligence, that is, if a loss results from an act for which it “can…”
Ind. Code § 34-13-8-3(18): 1 case
Brad Haskin v. City of Madison, Indiana, 999 N.E.2d 1047 (Ind. Ct. App. 2013).
Ind. Code § 34-13-8-3(3): 1 case
Simpson v. Op Prop. Mgmt., LLC, 939 N.E.2d 1098 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010). “~ However, in Dahms, we called into doubt whether Indiana Code Section 34-13-8-3(3) could ever be applied in a scenario where the government employee or entity being sued is not charged with the responsibility of keeping a roadway clear.”
Ind. Code § 34-13-8-3(5): 1 case
Noble Cnty. v. Rogers, 745 N.E.2d 194 (Ind. 2001). “§ 34-13-8-3(5) & (6). Indiana Trial Rule 65(C), which requires a party seeking a preliminary injunction to post a bond, exempts a "governmental organization" from that requirement but provides that "such governmental organization shall be responsible for costs and damages.”
Ind. Code § 34-13-8-3(6): 2 cases
Cody Waldrip v. Angela Waldrip, City of Bloomington, Indiana, Monroe Cnty., Indiana, State of Indiana, 976 N.E.2d 102 (Ind. Ct. App. 2012). “In her motion to dismiss, Angela argued that she was immune from all liability under ITCA pursuant to Indiana Code Section 34-13-8-3(6), which provides that a “governmental .”
PNC Bank, Indiana v. State, 750 N.E.2d 444 (Ind. Ct. App. 2001). “Indiana Code section 34-13-8-3(6) provides that a governmental entity is not liable for loss resulting from "the performance of a discretionary function.”
Ind. Code § 34-13-8-3(7): 2 cases
City of Indianapolis v. DUFFITT, 929 N.E.2d 231 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010). “; see Ind.Code § 34-13-8-3(7) (providing immunity for governmental entities or employees performing a discretionary function (emphasis supplied)); But see Scott v.”
Turner v. Sheriff of Marion Cnty., 94 F. Supp. 2d 966 (S.D. Ind. 2000). “Actions for false arrest and false imprisonment are specifically excluded from the Tort Claims Act’s “enforcement of a law” immunity, I.C. § 34-13-8-3(7), and we found in our summary judgment ruling that no other immunities apply.”
Ind. Code § 34-13-8-3(8): 3 cases
Simpson v. Op Prop. Mgmt., LLC, 939 N.E.2d 1098 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010). “~ However, in Dahms, we called into doubt whether Indiana Code Section 34-13-8-3(3) could ever be applied in a scenario where the government employee or entity being sued is not charged with the responsibility of keeping a roadway clear.”
Patrick v. Miresso, 821 N.E.2d 856 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005). “Appellants contend that they are immune from liability under Indiana Code Section 34-13-8-3(8), which provides that "[a] government entity or an employee acting within the scope of the employee's employment is not liable if a loss results from .”
Putnam Cnty. Sheriff v. Price, 930 N.E.2d 669 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010). “We note the Sheriffs motion to dismiss also raised the issue of immunity because of a temporary condition caused by weather pursuant to Indiana Code section 34-13-8-3(8). In Walton v. Ramp, 407 N.”
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.