Indiana's motion to correct error: optional for most appeals, mandatory for two

Indiana keeps a post-judgment motion most states abolished, and it runs backwards from what people expect. The motion to correct error is not a prerequisite to appealing — except for two specific complaints, where skipping it forfeits the point entirely.

Getting that backwards costs the appeal.

When you must file one

Ind. Trial Rule 59(A):

A Motion to Correct Error is not a prerequisite for appeal, except when a party seeks to address:

(1) Newly discovered material evidence, including alleged jury misconduct, capable of production within thirty (30) days of final judgment which, with reasonable diligence, could not have been discovered and produced at trial; or

(2) A claim that a jury verdict is excessive or inadequate. All other issues and grounds for appeal appropriately preserved during trial may be initially addressed in the appellate brief.

Two grounds, and only two:

Note the qualifier buried in (A)(1): the newly discovered evidence must be "capable of production within thirty (30) days of final judgment" and must be evidence that "with reasonable diligence, could not have been discovered and produced at trial." Both halves have to be true.

And note the limit in (D) on what a motion should contain when you do file one:

Where used, a motion to correct error need only address those errors found in Trial Rule 59 (A)(1) and (2). Any error raised however shall be stated in specific rather than general terms and shall be accompanied by a statement of facts and grounds upon which the error is based. The error claimed is not required to be stated under, or in the language of the bases for the motion allowed by this rule, by statute, or by other law.

So the motion is not a place to rehearse the whole trial. Specific terms, with facts and grounds — but you are not obliged to use the rule's own vocabulary to describe the error.

Thirty days, measured from the docket

Trial Rule 59(C):

The motion to correct error, if any, must be filed not later than thirty (30) days after the entry of a final judgment is noted in the Chronological Case Summary. The time at which the court is deemed to have ruled on the motion is set forth in T.R. 53.3.

The trigger is the notation in the Chronological Case Summary — Indiana's docket — not the date the judge signed anything and not the date you received it. Check the CCS entry.

The cross-reference to T.R. 53.3 matters too: Indiana has a deemed-denial rule, so a motion the court never rules on does not simply sit there.

Either side can start this. Rule 59(B): "The motion to correct error, if any, may be made by the trial court, or by any party." The court may raise it on its own.

Responding

Trial Rule 59(E) gives the opponent fifteen days and an unusually wide brief:

Following the filing of a motion to correct error, a party who opposes the motion may file a statement in opposition to the motion to correct error not later than fifteen [15] days after service of the motion. The statement in opposition may assert grounds which show that the final judgment or appealable final order should remain unchanged, or the statement in opposition may present other grounds which show that the party filing the statement in opposition is entitled to other relief.

So the response is not confined to defending the judgment — it can ask for relief of its own.

But Rule 59(G) means not responding is far less dangerous in Indiana than elsewhere:

If a motion to correct error is denied, the party who prevailed on that motion may, in the appellate brief and without having filed a statement in opposition to the motion to correct error in the trial court, defend against the motion to correct error on any ground and may first assert grounds for relief therein, including grounds falling within sections (A)(1) and (2) of this rule.

A party who won below and filed nothing has not waived anything, and can raise new grounds for the first time on appeal. The same subdivision lets an opponent raise cross-errors in the appellate brief where the other side filed a Notice of Appeal instead of a motion.

When the motion relies on evidence outside the record

Trial Rule 59(H) sets up an affidavit exchange with a hard stop:

(1) When a motion to correct error is based upon evidence outside the record, the motion shall be supported by affidavits showing the truth of the grounds set out in the motion and the affidavits shall be served with the motion.

(2) If a party opposes a motion to correct error made under this subdivision, that party has fifteen [15] days after service of the moving party's affidavits and motion, in which to file opposing affidavits.

…

(4) No reply affidavits, motions, or other papers from the party first moving to correct errors are contemplated under this subdivision.

The affidavits must be served with the motion, not supplied later. And the moving party gets no reply — one round only. Anything the movant wants the court to see has to be in the opening filing.

(H)(3) also lets the opposing party file its own motion to correct error within the same fifteen days, on matters relating to the relief the first movant sought.

What the court can do

Trial Rule 59(J) is a menu rather than a single remedy:

The court, if it determines that prejudicial or harmful error has been committed, shall take such action as will cure the error, including without limitation the following …

(1) Grant a new trial; (2) Enter final judgment; (3) Alter, amend, modify or correct judgment; (4) Amend or correct the findings or judgment as provided in Rule 52(B); (5) In the case of excessive or inadequate damages, enter final judgment on the evidence for the amount of the proper damages, grant a new trial, or grant a new trial subject to additur or remittitur; (6) Grant any other appropriate relief, or make relief subject to condition …

Indiana permits additur as well as remittitur, which many states do not.

Subdivision (J)(7) then constrains how the court exercises this on a weight-of-the-evidence challenge, and it imposes a real drafting burden on the judge:

In reviewing the evidence, the court shall grant a new trial if it determines that the verdict of a non-advisory jury is against the weight of the evidence; and shall enter judgment … if the court determines that the verdict of a non-advisory jury is clearly erroneous as contrary to or not supported by the evidence … If corrective relief is granted, the court shall specify the general reasons therefor. When a new trial is granted because the verdict, findings or judgment do not accord with the evidence, the court shall make special findings of fact upon each material issue or element of the claim or defense upon which a new trial is granted.

Two different standards with two different outcomes — against the weight produces a new trial, clearly erroneous produces judgment — and a new trial on weight grounds requires special findings.

Finally, (F) confirms the appeal path: "Any modification or setting aside of a final judgment or an appealable final order following the filing of a Motion to Correct Error shall be an appealable final judgment or order."

One exclusion to know

Trial Rule 59(K) removes a category outright: no motion to correct error is allowed concerning orders or decrees issued under the juvenile-services statutes it lists, and appeals of those "shall proceed as prescribed by Indiana Appellate Rule 14.1."

How Indiana compares

A short checklist

1. Decide first whether you even need one. For anything preserved at trial other than the two listed grounds, you can go straight to the appellate brief.
2. If your point is newly discovered evidence or an excessive or inadequate verdict, you must file. Skipping it forfeits the issue.
3. Find the Chronological Case Summary entry for the final judgment and count thirty days from it.
4. State the error in specific terms with a statement of facts and grounds.
5. If you rely on anything outside the record, serve the affidavits with the motion. There is no later supplement and no reply.
6. If you are opposing, you have fifteen days — and you may ask for relief of your own, or file your own motion to correct error in the same window.
7. If you won below, weigh whether to respond at all. Rule 59(G) preserves your grounds for the appellate brief either way.
8. Read T.R. 53.3 for when the motion is deemed ruled upon; the clock does not wait for the judge.

Where these rules live

• Ind. Trial Rule 52 — Findings by the Court
• Ind. Trial Rule 53.3 — Time limitation for ruling on motion to correct error
• Ind. Trial Rule 59 — Motion to correct error
• Ind. Trial Rule 60 — Relief from judgment or order

This page explains what the rules say. It isn't legal advice, and what makes newly discovered evidence sufficient under Rule 59(A)(1) is developed in case law this site doesn't cover.