IN · rules
Ind. Sup. Ct. Order Amending Rules: order-rules-2026-0306-evidence
order-rules-2026-0306-evidence
In the
Indiana Supreme Court
Cause No. 26S-MS-8
Order Amending Rules of Evidence
This Court requested the Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure to review
Evidence Rule 103(b) for possible amendment regarding preservation of evidentiary objections
made before trial. The Rules Committee has reviewed Rule 103(b) and proposed an amendment
to align the rule with Federal Rule of Evidence 103(b) to preserve objections made before and at
trial without renewing the objection during trial.
The Court has considered the proposed amendments. Under this Court’s authority to
establish procedures and supervise the administration of all courts in the state, Evidence Rule
103(b) is amended as set forth in Exhibit A to this order (deletions shown by strikethrough and
new text shown by underlining).
The amendment is effective July 1, 2026.
Done at Indianapolis, Indiana, on ___________ .
Loretta H. Rush
Chief Justice of Indiana
All Justices concur.
3/6/2026
Exhibit A
Indiana Rules of Evidence
…
Rule 103. Rulings on Evidence
…
(b) Not Needing to Renew an Objection or Offer of Proof.
Once the court rules definitively on the record—either before trial or at trial— a party need
not renew an objection or offer of proof to preserve a claim of error for appeal. This
includes a ruling on a motion in limine.
…
Provenance
- Source
- www.in.gov
- Retrieved
- 2026-10-02
- Edition
- supplied-in-25h-order-rules-2026-0306-evidence-2026-07-01
- Content hash
72895b200439bae1e950c239fa164668af07f74bf5354157407f38e1c642f4dc
The link goes to the issuing authority’s own document — the one we read to produce this record. Where a source publishes whole titles rather than sections, your browser may need a moment to jump to the provision.
Unofficial copy of government-published law, reproduced from official sources with full provenance. Not an official publication; verify against official sources before relying on it in a filing. Records in the 'guidance' corpus, and only that corpus, are sub-regulatory (interpretive guidelines, survey procedures) and are not binding law. Validity bounds follow each jurisdiction's declared temporalBasis.