Indiana Code

Ind. Code § 36-10-1-2 (2026)

"Park purposes"

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaInd. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Sec. 2. "Park purposes" include the establishment, equipment, and operation of parks, boulevards, pleasure drives, parkways, wheelways, park boulevards, bridlepaths, playgrounds, playfields, bathhouses, comfort stations, swimming pools, community centers, recreation centers, other recreational facilities, and recreational programs.

[Pre-Local Government Recodification Citations: 19-7-30-8 part; Part new.]

As added by Acts 1981, P.L.309, SEC.108.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 4 cases, 1999–2017 · leading case: McAlpin v. State, 72 N.E.3d 940 (Ind. Ct. App. 2017).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

McAlpin v. State, 72 N.E.3d 940 (Ind. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 4× “Ind. Code § 36-10-1-2 . Due to its location, the State argued that Bicentennial Park would be a wonderful place for home-schooled children to run around or for stay-at-home parents to take their young children for a walk.”

Krise v. State, 718 N.E.2d 1136 (Ind. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 3× “CODE § 36-10-1-2. During the State's case-in-chief, Decatur County Surveyor Brian Keith ("Keith") testified that his calculations taken from a plat map indicated that Krise's home was 870 feet from a park.”

Old Utica Sch. Pres., Inc. v. Utica Twp., 46 N.E.3d 1252 (Ind. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 2× “” Ind.Code § 36-10-1-2. Ind. Code § 36-10-7.”

Corey A. McAlpin v. State of Indiana (Ind. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 4× “Ind. Code § 36-10-1-2 . Due to its location, the State argued that Bicentennial Park would be a wonderful place for home-schooled children to run around or for stay-at-home parents to take their young children for a walk.”

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.