Odd Indiana laws

January 17, 2011
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A recent appearance by former Marion County Prosecutor Carl Brizzi on an Indianapolis-area radio morning show prompted a discussion among Indiana Lawyer staffers about strange laws in Indiana. I just caught the tail end of Brizzi’s time on the show, but he had to answer a multiple-choice question as to which of the listed things were illegal in Indiana. If he got it correct, a caller would win a prize.

His question was something like “which of the following is illegal under Indiana law: visiting a hypnotist without a physician’s referral to lose weight, stop smoking, or stop swearing?” He answered correctly: stop swearing.

Indiana Code 25-20.5-1-23 made it illegal for a hypnotist to treat someone without a doctor’s referral for mental illness, addictions, various orders, pain control, or in preparation for a medical or dental procedure. But you could go see a hypnotist legally to lose weight or stop smoking without having your doctor OK it. I did some double checking, and it appears I.C. 25-20.5 has been repealed, so feel free to see a hypnotist for any reason with a clear conscience.

I did a search online and came across websites that listed “dumb” and “stupid” Indiana laws, but the majority of them have since been repealed or were no longer listed when I searched the code. Apparently hotel sheets had to be exactly 99 inches long and 81 inches wide, baths couldn’t be taken from October to March (gosh, Indiana must have been smelly in the winters), and a man over the age of 18 could be arrested for statutory rape if the female passenger in his car wasn’t wearing socks and shoes and was under the age of 17.

I did find two on the site that were still in effect. It’s against the law to catch a fish with dynamite, firearms, crossbow, or your bare hands, although it would be a pretty impressive feat to grab a fish or shoot it with a crossbow.

Another strange law - Liquor stores can’t sell cold soft drinks or water. I don’t know the back story as to why, perhaps to prevent children from wanting to come in and buy a soda or decrease the chance that you’ll break open your freshly purchased bottle of rum and mix it with a cold soda right then and there?

As lawyers and judges, you must have come across some odd laws. We’d like to know what you’ve found as you’ve practiced. Feel free to include ones that you know have since been repealed.

ADVERTISEMENT
  • Indiana Pi Bill
    The strangest Indiana law that I had ever heard of was a bill, not a law. In 1897, an Indiana Representative introduced a bill into the General Assembly to have pi mean something other than "3.a string of numbers." Wikipedia even has an article about it:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indiana_Pi_Bill
  • Baseball on Sunday and English First
    2 nominees:

    Code of 1886 or thereabouts: Article 3, Section 313 of Crimes and Criminal Procedure: It was against the law for any person to play baseball where a fee was charged, or where a prize or reward depended on the result, on "the first day of the week, commonly known as Sunday." Misdemeanor punishable by a fine of $25.

    And, though not a criminal law, but one of interest in view of legislation relating to language in government documents, the Code of 1852 required that the Constitution and Laws of Indiana be published in English and German.
  • Indiana Pi Bill
    Ri are round, cornbread are square

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. Such things are no more elections than those in the late, unlamented Soviet Union.

  2. It appears the police and prosecutors are allowed to change the rules halfway through the game to suit themselves. I am surprised that the congress has not yet eliminated the right to a trial in cases involving any type of forensic evidence. That would suit their foolish law and order police state views. I say we eliminate the statute of limitations for crimes committed by members of congress and other government employees. Of course they would never do that. They are all corrupt cowards!!!

  3. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  4. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  5. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

ADVERTISEMENT