Rule 53.1.Failure to rule on motion

Trial Rule 53.1 gives Indiana litigants a formal way to move a case away from a judge who is sitting on a ruling. If a court fails for thirty days to set a motion for a hearing, or fails to rule on a motion within thirty days after a hearing, or within thirty days after filing when no hearing is required, an interested party can ask that the case be pulled away from that judge and sent to the Indiana Supreme Court, which appoints a special judge to take over. Nothing happens on its own, though — a party has to take the affirmative step described later in the rule; the case doesn’t move just because the clock runs out.

Two kinds of delay don’t count against the judge. First, once a case is sent to alternative dispute resolution, the clock stops until a report on that process comes back to the court. Second, if the court lets the parties file written submissions after a hearing, the clock doesn’t start until every party has filed, or until the court’s own deadline for those submissions passes, whichever comes first — and the court has to note that deadline in the case’s Chronological Case Summary for the exclusion to apply.

The rule also carves out situations where the ordinary thirty-day clock never applies at all. A court can order, within thirty days of a motion’s filing, that the motion be decided at trial instead of ruled on separately. The parties can agree on the record that the time limit won’t apply to a given motion. And the rule leaves out an entire category of motions: repetitive motions, motions to reconsider, motions to correct error, petitions for post-conviction relief, and routine post-judgment tasks — those are governed by their own rules instead.

A judge isn’t without options. Before the deadline runs out, a judicial officer can add thirty more days — for a motion under this rule, for a case held under advisement under Trial Rule 53.2, or for a motion to correct error under Trial Rule 53.3 — by noting the extension in the Chronological Case Summary and telling the parties. That’s the only extension available without the parties’ written agreement to go further.

Making the rule work takes a specific filing. An interested party files a praecipe naming the exact motion or decision that’s overdue and notifies the Chief Administrative Officer of the Indiana Office of Judicial Administration. The clerk logs the filing and forwards it along with the case summary. The CAO then determines whether the ruling is late — if not, the case stays right where it is and everyone gets written notice of that finding; if the ruling is late, the CAO notifies the judge and both clerks that the case has been pulled, effective as of the moment the praecipe was filed, and sends the matter to the Supreme Court to appoint a special judge or take whatever other action fits.

There are limits on both sides. If the case is pulled from a judge, that judge has to file a written report with the Supreme Court within ten days, explaining what was held over past the deadline. And if the party who filed the praecipe turns around and files more motions, correspondence, or other paperwork in the case before the matter is resolved, that party gives up the right to remove the judge — the praecipe becomes void. Once a praecipe is filed, every deadline in the case freezes until the praecipe is resolved. The Supreme Court keeps a permanent record of every special judge appointment made this way.