Indiana Code
Ind. Code § 4-22-2-1 (2026)
Repealed
✓ current as of May 2026
Formerly: Acts 1945, c.120, s.1. As amended by P.L.5-1984, SEC.173. Repealed by P.L.31-1985, SEC.50.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12
cases, 1974–1998 · leading case: Indiana Dep't of Env't Mgmt. v. Amax, Inc., 529 N.E.2d 1209 (Ind. Ct. App. 1988).
Indiana Dep't of Env't Mgmt. v. Amax, Inc., 529 N.E.2d 1209 (Ind. Ct. App. 1988). “The trial court's findings numbered twenty-eight (28) and twenty-nine (29) provide in relevant part: "In adopting the guidelines the SPCB did not follow the procedures for the promulgation of regulations. The staff nonetheless was instructed to follow the guidelines in…”
Union Twp. Sch. Corp. v. State Ex Rel. Joyce, 706 N.E.2d 183 (Ind. Ct. App. 1998). “In this case, the Implementation Manual is not a duly adopted rule but an internal document compiled by the Commissioner without following the procedures prescribed for the adoption of rules under Indiana Code §§ 4-22-2-1 through 4-22-2-46.”
Indiana Alcoholic Beverage Comm'n v. McShane, 354 N.E.2d 259 (Ind. Ct. App. 1976). “To enjoin the ABC at such an early stage, before any affirmative action has been taken, anticipates its final decision and is unwarranted under the circumstances of this case. Ill Third, issuance of the trial court’s injunction violated the venerable separation of powers clause…”
Jones v. Sullivan, 703 N.E.2d 1102 (Ind. Ct. App. 1998). “l-4-l(b); Ind.Code § 4-22-2-1; the Due Process and Equal Protection clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution; Article I, § 23 and Article I, § 12 of the Indiana Constitution.”
Denman v. State, 432 N.E.2d 426 (Ind. Ct. App. 1982). “Still challenging the admissibility of the breathalyzer results, Denman argues that there were no properly promulgated rules and regulations [Ind.Code 4-22-2-1] concerning the techniques approved for administration of the test.”
Bowen v. Metro. Bd. of Zon. App. in Marion Cty., 317 N.E.2d 193 (Ind. Ct. App. 1974). “Nevertheless, the parties have argued in their briefs before the Superior Court and in both their briefs and their oral arguments here many “facts” which are not in evidence and are not facts of which either court can take judicial notice. The two principle sources to which…”
Greenwood Prof'l Park v. Pub. Serv. Comm'n, 487 N.E.2d 472 (Ind. Ct. App. 1986). “In other references, the Commission found that individual metering “would not defeat the PURPA objective_” While the language does not track the regulation, form will not be exalted over substance if, in fact, the proper standard has been applied.”
Indiana State Bd. of Tax Commissioners v. Ropp, 446 N.E.2d 20 (Ind. Ct. App. 1983). “Ind.Code 4-22-2-1 et seq. provides a statutory scheme for the promulgation of rules and regulations of state agencies.”
Claus ex rel. Claus v. Goshert, 657 F. Supp. 237 (N.D. Ind. 1987). “The plaintiffs alleged that the attempt to implement Public Law 141 constituted a violation of the Indiana Administrative Adjudication Act, I.C. §§ 4-22-2-1 et seq., and further violated due process rights secured by the Fourteenth Amendment, and federal regulations promulgated…”
Indiana State Bd. of Tax Com'rs v. Ropp, 446 N.E.2d 20 (Ind. Ct. App. 1983). “Ind. Code 4-22-2-1 et seq. provides a statutory scheme for the promulgation of rules and regulations of state agencies.”
Union Twp. Sch. Corp. v. State ex rel. Joyce, 696 N.E.2d 399 (Ind. Ct. App. 1998). “In this case, the Implementation Manual is not a duly adopted rule but an internal document compiled by the Commissioner without following the procedures prescribed for the adoption of rules under Indiana Code §§ 4-22-2-1 through 4-22-2-46.”
Claus by Claus v. Goshert, 657 F. Supp. 237 (N.D. Ind. 1987). “The plaintiffs alleged that the attempt to implement Public Law 141 constituted a violation of the Indiana Administrative Adjudication Act, I.C. §§ 4-22-2-1 et seq., and further violated due process rights secured by the Fourteenth Amendment, and federal regulations promulgated…”
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.