Indiana Code

Ind. Code § 4-33-9-2 (2026)

Repealed

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

As added by P.L.277-1993(ss), SEC.124. Amended by P.L.20-1995, SEC.15; P.L.55-1995, SEC.3; P.L.192-2002(ss), SEC.16. Repealed by P.L.268-2017, SEC.24.

 

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases, 2000–2004 · leading case: John H. Harkins v. Riverboat Servs., Inc., 385 F.3d 1099 (7th Cir. 2004).
John H. Harkins v. Riverboat Servs., Inc., 385 F.3d 1099 (7th Cir. 2004). “(It is hard to believe that weather or water conditions, though basically the only statutory excuses for allowing gambling while the boat is docked, Ind. Code § 4-33-9-2 , prevent its sailing 90 percent of the time.”
Hoosier Env't Council, Inc. v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 105 F. Supp. 2d 953 (S.D. Ind. 2000). · cites it 2× “Ind.Code § 4-33-9-2. To enable the proposed riverboat vessel to cruise as required by Indiana law, Caesars needed to dredge approximately 28,000 cubic yards of material from the river bottom.”
Grand Victoria Casino & Resort, LP v. Indiana Dep't of State Revenue, 789 N.E.2d 1041 (Ind. T.C. 2003). “CopE § 4-33-9-2 (1998) (providing that "gambling may not be conducted while a riverboat is docked") (amended by Pub.”
Trump Indiana, Inc. v. Indiana Dep't of State Revenue, 790 N.E.2d 192 (Ind. T.C. 2003). · cites it 2× “See Ind.Code § 4-33-9-2 (1998) (providing that “gambling may not be conducted while a riverboat is docked”) (amended by Pub.”
Harkins, John v. Riverboat Servs. (7th Cir. 2004). “(It is hard to believe that weather or water conditions, though basically the only statutory excuses for allowing gambling while the boat is docked, Ind. Code § 4-33-9-2 , prevent its sailing 90 percent of the time.”
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.