(A) Time limitation for ruling. In the event a court fails for thirty days to set a motion for hearing or fails to rule on a motion within thirty days after it was heard or thirty days after it was filed, if no hearing is required, upon application by an interested party and notice to the Chief Administrative Officer of the Indiana Office of Judicial Administration, the submission of the cause may be withdrawn from the trial judge and transferred to the Supreme Court for the appointment of a special judge.
Rule 53.1.Failure to rule on motion
Current through July 1, 2026 · Last verified July 13, 2026
In one sentenceTrial Rule 53.1 lets a party pull a case away from a judge who misses the thirty-day deadline to set a motion for hearing or to rule on it, transferring the matter to a special judge appointed by the Supreme Court.
Full Text of Rule 53.1
(B) Excluded Time Periods. The time limitation for ruling on a motion established under Section (A) of this rule must exclude:
(1) any period after which the case is referred to alternative dispute resolution and until a report on the alternative dispute resolution is submitted to the court; and
(2) any period during which the court has permitted the parties to file post-hearing sub- missions. If the court allows post-hearing submissions, the court must make an entry on the Chronological Case Summary stating the date by which the parties are to file the sub- missions. The time limitation for ruling established under Section (A) begins when all parties have filed their post-hearing submissions or when the deadline for submissions occurs, whichever is first.
(C) Exceptions. The time limitation for ruling on a motion established under Section (A) does not apply where:
(1) The Court, within thirty days after filing, orders that a motion be considered during the trial on the merits of the cause; or
(2) The parties who have appeared or their counsel stipulate or agree on record that the time limitation for ruling on a motion does not apply; or
(3) The ruling in question involves a repetitive motion, a motion to reconsider, a motion to correct error, a petition for post-conviction relief, or a ministerial post-judgment act.
(D) Time of ruling. For the purposes of Section (A), a court is deemed to have set a motion for hearing on the date the setting is noted in the Chronological Case Summary, and to have ruled on the date the ruling is noted in the Chronological Case Summary.
(E) Extension of time for ruling. A judicial officer may extend the time limitation set forth under Trial Rule 53.1, 53.2, or 53.3 by an additional thirty days by an entry in the Chronological Case Summary and notice to the parties made prior to the time period's expiration. A judicial officer is not entitled to further additional extension without the parties' written consent.
(F) Procedure for withdrawing submission. Upon the filing by an interested party of a praecipe specifically designating the motion or decision delayed and notice to the Chief Administrative Officer of the Indiana Office of Judicial Administration, the Clerk of the court must enter the date and time of the filing on the prae- cipe, record the filing in the Chronological Case Summary under the cause, which entry must also include the date and time of the filing of the praecipe, and promptly forward the prae- cipe and a copy of the Chronological Case Summary to the CAO. The CAO must determine whether or not a ruling has been delayed beyond the time limitation set forth under Trial Rule 53.1 or 53.2.
(1) If the CAO determines that the ruling or decision has not been delayed, the CAO must provide notice of the determination in writing to the Clerk of the court where the case is pending and the submission of the cause must not be withdrawn. The Clerk of the court where the case is pending must notify, in writing, the judge and all parties of record in the proceeding and record the determination in the Chronological Case Summary under the cause.
(2) If the CAO determines that a ruling or decision has been delayed beyond the time lim- itation set forth under Trial Rule 53.1 or 53.2, the CAO must give written notice of the determination to the judge, the Clerk of the trial court, and the Clerk of the Supreme Court of Indiana that the submission of the case has been withdrawn from the judge. The with- drawal is effective as of the time of the filing of the praecipe. The Clerk of the trial court must record this determination in the Chronological Case Summary under the cause and provide notice to all parties in the case. The CAO must submit the case to the Supreme Court of Indiana for appointment of a special judge or such other action deemed appro- priate by the Supreme Court.
(G) Report to Supreme Court. When a special judge is appointed under Trial Rule 53.1 or 53.2, the judge from whom sub- mission was withdrawn must, within ten days from receipt of the order appointing a special judge, file a written report in the Supreme Court under the cause appointing the special judge. This report must fully state the nature of the matters held in excess of the time lim- itations. Additionally, the report may relate any other facts or circumstances which the judge deems pertinent.
(H) Waiver and tolling.
(1) If the requesting party files additional motions, correspondence, or pleadings after filing a praecipe, the requesting party waives the right to remove the judicial officer from the case, and the praecipe is void and of no effect.
(2) Once a praecipe is filed, all time limitations are tolled until resolution of the praecipe.
(I) Permanent record. The Supreme Court must maintain a permanent record of special judge appointments under Trial Rules 53.1 and 53.2.
Amendment History
This rule’s current text took effect February 2, 2026. For the full history of earlier amendments and adoption orders, see the Indiana Office of Court Services.
Plain-English Summary
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.
Frequently Asked Questions
What happens if a judge doesn’t rule on my motion within thirty days?
Trial Rule 53.1 lets an interested party ask that the case be taken away from that judge and sent to the Indiana Supreme Court for the appointment of a special judge — but only after the court has failed for thirty days to set the motion for a hearing, or has failed to rule within thirty days of a hearing, or within thirty days of filing if no hearing is required.
Does the case get moved automatically once thirty days pass?
No. An interested party has to file a praecipe naming the specific motion or decision that’s overdue and notify the Chief Administrative Officer of the Indiana Office of Judicial Administration. Until that happens, the case stays with the original judge.
Are any delays excluded from the thirty-day count?
Yes. Time spent in alternative dispute resolution doesn’t count until a report on that process reaches the court, and time spent waiting on post-hearing written submissions the court allowed doesn’t count until every party has filed or the court’s own deadline for filing passes, whichever happens first.
Can a judge get more time to rule?
A judicial officer can add thirty days by entering the extension in the Chronological Case Summary and notifying the parties before the original deadline runs out. Beyond that single extension, more time requires the parties’ written consent.
Does this rule apply to a motion to correct error?
No. Motions to correct error, along with repetitive motions, motions to reconsider, petitions for post-conviction relief, and routine post-judgment tasks, fall outside Trial Rule 53.1’s time limit — motions to correct error have their own separate time-limit rule.
What if a party files more paperwork after asking to have the judge removed?
Filing additional motions, correspondence, or pleadings after filing the praecipe waives that party’s right to remove the judge — the praecipe becomes void and has no effect.
Does withdrawing the case guarantee a better outcome?
No. Trial Rule 53.1 addresses delay, not the merits — it moves the case to a special judge appointed by the Supreme Court, who then decides the pending matters. It doesn’t say how those matters must be decided.
Source & verification. The rule text is reproduced verbatim from the
official Indiana Rules of Trial Procedure (T.R. 53.1). Prescribed by the Supreme Court of Indiana, under its inherent constitutional rulemaking power (reaffirmed by Ind. Code 34-8-1-1 and 34-8-2-1); originally enacted by the Indiana General Assembly in 1969. The plain-English summary is original and written by us. Last verified July 13, 2026. ·
Official source
Also known as: Trial Rule 53.1 Indianaindiana lazy judge rulejudge wont rule on my motion indianahow to remove a judge for delay indianapraecipe for withdrawal of submission indianathirty day rule judge ruling indiana