Indiana Code
Ind. Code § 34-51-4-9 (2026)
Rate of prejudgment interest
✓ current as of May 2026
Sec. 9. The court shall compute the prejudgment interest at the simple rate of interest determined by the court. The rate set by the court may not be less than six percent (6%) per year and not more than ten percent (10%) per year.
[Pre-1998 Recodification Citation: 34-4-37-11.]
As added by P.L.1-1998, SEC.47.
IC 34-51-5Chapter 5. Tax Consequences of Verdict in Tort Action; Jury
Instructions
34-51-5-0.2Application of prior law
34-51-5-1Tax consequences of verdict
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 17
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1999–2025 · leading case: Johnson v. Eldridge, 799 N.E.2d 29 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003).
Johnson v. Eldridge, 799 N.E.2d 29 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003). “See Ind.Code § 34-51-4-9 (1999). The trial court is further limited to awarding prejudgment interest for a maximum period of forty-eight months.”
Thor Elec., Inc. v. Oberle & Assocs., Inc., 741 N.E.2d 373 (Ind. Ct. App. 2000). “Indiana Code Section 34-51-4 Indiana Code Section 84-51-4 provides for the award of prejudgment interest in tort actions. The rate of prejudgment interest is determined by the court, but may not be less than six percent annually or greater than ten percent annually.”
Cherry v. State, 772 N.E.2d 433 (Ind. Ct. App. 2002). “See Ind.Code § 34-51-4-9 ("The court shall compute the prejudgment interest at the simple rate of interest determined by the court.”
United States Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Church Extension of the Church of God, Inc., 429 F. Supp. 2d 1045 (S.D. Ind. 2005). “The rate of 6 percent is based on Indiana Code § 34-51-4-9 and relatively low market rates since 2001.”
HUPFER v. Miller, 890 N.E.2d 7 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008). “See Ind.Code § 34-51-4-9 (1999). Miller sent a letter to Hupfer dated April 13, 2005 with an offer to settle.”
City of Gary v. Conat, 810 N.E.2d 1112 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004). “However, Conat maintains that I.C. § 34-51-4-9 is applicable to Calo, provided that the interest rate, set by the court, may not be less than six percent and not more than 10 percent per year.”
Van Winkle v. Nash, 761 N.E.2d 856 (Ind. Ct. App. 2002). “§ 34-51-4-9. Notwithstanding the restrictions that the statute places upon the award of prejudgment interest, Van Winkle asserts that it is unconstitutionally vague because it gives a trial court insufficient guidelines on how to exercise its discretion.”
Weintraut v. Comm'r, 2016 T.C. Memo. 142 (Tax Ct. 2016). “34-51-4-9 (LexisNexis 2008) establishes the prejudgment interest rate where an award for tortious conduct has been made "at the simple rate of interest determined by the court.”
Margaret Kosarko v. William A. Padula, Adm'r of the Est. of Daniel L. Herndobler, 979 N.E.2d 144 (Ind. 2012). “§ 34-51-4-9. On appeal, Kosarko contends that the trial court abused its discretion when it applied the common law Roper standard to deny her request for prejudgment interest.”
Kosarko v. Padula, 960 N.E.2d 810 (Ind. Ct. App. 2011). “Permitting the trial court to determine the amount of prejudgment interest seems particularly appropriate where, as here, the legislature explicitly placed within the court's discretion the setting of multiple values necessary to compute the amount of prejudgment interest due.”
Inman v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 938 N.E.2d 1276 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010). “§ 34-51-4-9. The court is further limited to awarding interest for a maximum period of forty-eight months.”
Indiana ex rel. Zoeller v. Pastrick, 696 F. Supp. 2d 970 (N.D. Ind. 2010). “§ 34-51-4-9. The court selects 8 percent, which is the same rate plaintiffs have requested.”
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.