Indiana Code

Ind. Code § 36-7-8-3 (2026)

Establishment of building, heating, ventilating, electrical, plumbing, and sanitation standards; ordinances

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

     Sec. 3. (a) The legislative body of a county having a county department of buildings or joint city-county building department may, by ordinance, adopt building, heating, ventilating, air conditioning, electrical, plumbing, and sanitation standards for unincorporated areas of the county. These standards take effect only on the legislative body's receipt of written approval from the fire prevention and building safety commission.

     (b) An ordinance adopted under this section must be based on occupancy, and it applies to:

(1) the construction, alteration, equipment, use, occupancy, location, and maintenance of buildings, structures, and appurtenances that are on land or over water and are:

(A) erected after the ordinance takes effect; and

(B) if expressly provided by the ordinance, existing when the ordinance takes effect;

(2) conversions of buildings and structures, or parts of them, from one occupancy classification to another; and

(3) the movement or demolition of buildings, structures, and equipment for the operation of buildings and structures.

     (c) The rules of the fire prevention and building safety commission are the minimum standards upon which ordinances adopted under this section must be based.

     (d) An ordinance adopted under this section does not apply to private homes that are built by individuals and used for their own occupancy. However, onsite sewage systems of a private home described in this subsection must comply with state laws and rules.

[Pre-Local Government Recodification Citation: 17-2-72-1 part.]

As added by Acts 1981, P.L.309, SEC.27. Amended by P.L.8-1984, SEC.125; P.L.208-2015, SEC.19.

 

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases, 1996–2013 · leading case: Noble Cnty. v. Rogers, 745 N.E.2d 194 (Ind. 2001).
Noble Cnty. v. Rogers, 745 N.E.2d 194 (Ind. 2001). · cites it 4× “The court first held that the pertinent Noble County ordinances amounted to a "building code" under Indiana Code § 36-7-8-3 and not a *196 "housing code" under Indiana Code § 36-7-8-4.”
Rogers v. Noble Cnty. Ex Rel. Noble Cnty. Bd. of Commissioners, 679 N.E.2d 158 (Ind. Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 16× “Code § 36-7-8-4, the identical requirements adopted pursuant to Ind.Code § 36-7-8-3 and thus circumvent the 3(d) exemption.”
Washington Cnty. Health Dep't v. White, 878 N.E.2d 224 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 20× “Indiana Code § 36-7-8-3 states: (a) The legislative body of a county having a county department of buildings or joint city-county building department may, by ordinance, adopt building, heating, ventilating, air conditioning, electrical, plumbing, and sanitation standards for…”
Noble Cnty. Bd. of Commissioners v. Fahlsing, 714 N.E.2d 1134 (Ind. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 22× “denied, we held that Noble County enacted its Building Code pursuant to Indiana Code Section 36-7-8-3, which provides: (a) The legislative body of a county having a county department of buildings or joint city-county building department may, by ordinance, adopt building,…”
Robinson v. Monroe Cnty., 663 N.E.2d 196 (Ind. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 6× “We also reiterate that our decision and discussion in the instant case is confined to exempting individu *198 als from the requirements set out in IC § 36-7-8-3 "and does not provide a similar exemption from the requirements set out in Section 4 concerning minimum housing…”
Noble Cnty. ex rel. Noble Cnty. Bd. of Commissioners v. Rogers, 717 N.E.2d 591 (Ind. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 2× “The finding of the trial court that the Noble County Building Code has been enacted pursuant to both Ind.Code § 36-7-8-3 and § 36-7-8-4 is erroneous.”
Henry Wagler, Barb Wagler & Henry & Barb Wagler, LP v. Fort Wayne-Allen Cnty. Dep't of Health, 983 N.E.2d 190 (Ind. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 20× “However, even if we had determined that the Whites satisfied the Subsection (d) exception, they still would have been required to comply with the Health Code regulations.”
— Ind. Code § 36-7-8-3(a) — 1 case
Robinson v. Monroe Cnty., 663 N.E.2d 196 (Ind. Ct. App. 1996). “We also reiterate that our decision and discussion in the instant case is confined to exempting individu *198 als from the requirements set out in IC § 36-7-8-3 "and does not provide a similar exemption from the requirements set out in Section 4 concerning minimum housing…”
— Ind. Code § 36-7-8-3(d) — 6 cases
Noble Cnty. v. Rogers, 745 N.E.2d 194 (Ind. 2001). “The court first held that the pertinent Noble County ordinances amounted to a "building code" under Indiana Code § 36-7-8-3 and not a *196 "housing code" under Indiana Code § 36-7-8-4.”
Noble Cnty. Bd. of Commissioners v. Fahlsing, 714 N.E.2d 1134 (Ind. Ct. App. 1999). “denied, we held that Noble County enacted its Building Code pursuant to Indiana Code Section 36-7-8-3, which provides: (a) The legislative body of a county having a county department of buildings or joint city-county building department may, by ordinance, adopt building,…”
Robinson v. Monroe Cnty., 663 N.E.2d 196 (Ind. Ct. App. 1996). “We also reiterate that our decision and discussion in the instant case is confined to exempting individu *198 als from the requirements set out in IC § 36-7-8-3 "and does not provide a similar exemption from the requirements set out in Section 4 concerning minimum housing…”
Washington Cnty. Health Dep't v. White, 878 N.E.2d 224 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007). “Indiana Code § 36-7-8-3 states: (a) The legislative body of a county having a county department of buildings or joint city-county building department may, by ordinance, adopt building, heating, ventilating, air conditioning, electrical, plumbing, and sanitation standards for…”
Rogers v. Noble Cnty. Ex Rel. Noble Cnty. Bd. of Commissioners, 679 N.E.2d 158 (Ind. Ct. App. 1997). “Code § 36-7-8-4, the identical requirements adopted pursuant to Ind.Code § 36-7-8-3 and thus circumvent the 3(d) exemption.”
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.