Rule 9.2.Pleading and proof of written instruments
Current through July 1, 2026 · Last verified July 13, 2026
In one sentenceTrial Rule 9.2 requires a party suing on a written contract, account, or purchased debt to attach the instrument (or a detailed sworn Affidavit of Debt) to the pleading, and it sets out how execution of that instrument is proved, challenged, and presumed.
(A)When instrument or copy, or an Affidavit of Debt shall be filed. When any pleading allowed by these rules is founded on a written instrument, the original, or a copy thereof, shall be included in or filed with the pleading. Such instrument, whether copied in the pleadings or not, shall be taken as part of the record. Further,
(1)if the claim:
(a)arises out of a written contract, a copy shall be attached; however, the fact that a copy of such contract is not in the custody of the plaintiff shall not bar the filing of the claim; or
(b)is on an account, an Affidavit of Debt, in a form substantially similar to Appendix A-2 shall be attached;
(2)in addition to the requirements set forth above in subsection (1), if the plaintiff is not the original creditor, and the claim arises from a debt that is primarily for personal, family, or household purposes, the plaintiff shall provide an Affidavit of Debt that shall have attached as one or more Exhibits which shall include:
(a)a copy of the contract or other writing evidencing the original debt, which shall con- tain a signature of the defendant. If a claim is based on credit card or other debt and no such signed writing evidencing the original debt ever existed, then copies of doc- uments generated when the debt was incurred or the credit card was actually used shall be attached; and
(b)a chronological listing of the names of all prior owners of the debt and the date of each transfer of ownership of the debt, beginning with the name of the original cred- itor; and
(c)a certified or other properly authenticated copy of the bill of sale or other document that transferred ownership of the debt to the plaintiff.
(d)Subsection (2) does not apply to mortgage foreclosures.
(B)Proof of execution of instruments filed with pleadings. When a pleading is founded on a written instrument and the instrument or a copy thereof is included in or filed with the pleading, execution of such instrument, indorsement, or assign- ment shall be deemed to be established and the instrument, if otherwise admissible, shall be deemed admitted into evidence in the action without proving its execution unless execution be denied under oath in the responsive pleading or by an affidavit filed therewith. A denial asserting that another person who is not a party did execute the instrument, indorsement, or assignment may be made without such oath or affidavit only if the pleader alleges under oath or in an accompanying affidavit that after the exercise of reasonable diligence he was unable to make such person or his representative (subdivision (H)) a party, the reason there- for, and that he is without information as to such execution.
(C)Oath or affidavit of denial of execution must be made upon personal knowledge. An oath or affidavit denying execution as required and made under subdivision (B) of this rule shall be made upon the personal knowledge of the person making it, and, if general in form (Rule 11(B)), shall be deemed to be made upon such personal knowledge.
(D)Burden of proving execution. The ultimate burden of proving the execution of a written instrument is upon the party claim- ing its validity, but execution is presumed. “Presumed” means that the trier of fact must find the existence of the fact presumed unless and until evidence is introduced which would sup- port a finding of its nonexistence.
(E)Inspection of the original instrument. When a copy of a written instrument is filed with or copied in the pleadings under the pro- visions of this rule, the pleader shall permit inspection of the original unless it is alleged that the original is lost, whether by destruction, theft or otherwise, or unless it is alleged or estab- lished that the instrument is in the possession of another person and out of the control of the pleader or that the duty to allow inspection is otherwise excused. The pleader shall allow inspection promptly upon request of a party, and inspection may be ordered by the court upon motion without a hearing at any time. A party failing to comply with such request or such order shall be subject to the provisions of Rule 37(B). This provision shall not diminish a party’s rights under Rules 26 through 38.
(F)Effect of non-compliance--Amendments. Non-compliance with the provisions of this rule requiring a written instrument or an Affidavit of Debt to be included with the pleading may be raised by the first responsive pleading or prior motion of a party. The court, in its sound discretion, may order compliance, the reasons for non-compliance to be added to the pleadings, or allow the action to continue without fur- ther pleading. Amendments to correct the omission of a required written instrument, an assignment or indorsement thereof, the omission of a denial of the execution of a written instrument as permitted or required by this rule, or an Affidavit of Debt shall be governed by Rule 15, except as provided by subdivision (A) of this rule.
(G)Exceptions--Infants, incompetents, dead and insolvent persons. The requirement of this rule that execution of a written instrument be denied under oath or otherwise, shall not apply against a party who is not required to file a responsive pleading, or against a party who, at the time the responsive pleading is due or before the pleadings are closed, is or becomes dead, an infant or adjudicated incompetent or is the representative of such person or of a person who is dead, an infant, an adjudicated incompetent, or in insolv- ency proceedings. Such parties shall be deemed to have denied execution or admissibility without any responsive pleading or denial. The presumption of execution as provided in sub- division (D) of this rule shall not apply to establish execution of a written instrument by a per- son who, at the time proof is required, is dead, an infant or adjudicated incompetent.
(H)“Execution” of a written instrument. “Execution” of a written instrument includes the following requirements:
(1)That a signature was made with express, implied or apparent authority and was not forged;
(2)That the instrument was properly delivered, including any requisite intent that it be effective;
(3)That the written terms of the instrument have not been materially altered without the express, implied or apparent authority of the person bound thereon;
(4)That the person seeking its enforcement is in possession of the instrument when required; and
(5)That the names or identity of the persons named in the instrument are correct.
(I)“Written instrument”: When pleading is founded thereon--When pleading is not founded thereon term includes documents. When a pleading is founded upon a written instrument, any written indorsement or assign- ment of rights thereof upon which the pleader’s title depends is included in the term “written instrument.”
Amendment History
This rule’s current text took effect July 15, 2021. For the full history of earlier amendments and adoption orders, see the Indiana Office of Court Services.
Plain-English Summary
When a claim rests on a written document, Rule 9.2 wants that document in front of the court from the start rather than described secondhand. Section (A) requires the original or a copy of the instrument to be attached to or filed with the pleading. A claim on a written contract needs a copy attached, though not having a copy on hand does not stop the claim from being filed. A claim on an account instead needs a sworn Affidavit of Debt in the form the rule specifies.
The rule goes further for a particular kind of case: a plaintiff who is not the original creditor, suing on a personal, family, or household debt. That plaintiff — typically a debt buyer — must file an Affidavit of Debt with supporting exhibits: a copy of the signed contract or account-opening documents (or, for credit-card debt with no signed writing, the records generated when the debt was incurred or the card was used), a chronological list of every prior owner of the debt and when it changed hands, and a certified or otherwise authenticated bill of sale or other document transferring ownership to the plaintiff. This chain-of-title requirement does not apply to mortgage foreclosures.
Sections (B) through (D) handle proof of execution — whether the document was signed, indorsed, or assigned as claimed. If the instrument or a copy is filed with the pleading, execution is treated as established and the document comes into evidence without further proof, unless the other side denies execution under oath in their answer or by affidavit. That denial has to rest on personal knowledge, not just belief. The party relying on the instrument still carries the ultimate burden of proving execution, but the rule presumes execution until the other side introduces evidence supporting its nonexistence.
Section (E) gives any party the right to inspect the original document once a copy has been filed, with narrow exceptions for a lost original or one outside the filer’s control; refusing a proper request can bring discovery sanctions. Section (F) lets a court fix a missing-instrument problem by ordering compliance or allowing amendment rather than automatically dismissing the case. Section (G) excuses parties who are dead, minors, incompetent, insolvent, or otherwise not required to answer from having to deny execution under oath. Section (H) defines what “execution” means — genuine, authorized signature, proper delivery, no unauthorized alteration of terms, possession by the person enforcing it, and correctly identified parties.
Frequently Asked Questions
Do I have to attach the contract to my complaint if I am suing for breach of contract?
Generally, yes. If your claim arises out of a written contract, Rule 9.2(A) requires a copy to be attached to the pleading, though not having custody of a copy does not bar filing the claim.
What if I am suing on an unpaid account instead of a signed contract?
Rule 9.2(A) requires an Affidavit of Debt in the form the rule specifies, rather than a copy of a signed contract.
I bought someone’s old debt and want to sue on it — what extra proof does Indiana require?
If you are not the original creditor and the debt is a personal, family, or household debt, Rule 9.2(A)(2) requires a detailed Affidavit of Debt with exhibits: the signed contract or original account documents, a chronological chain of every prior owner of the debt, and a certified document transferring ownership to you. This requirement does not apply to mortgage foreclosures.
How do I challenge whether I signed a document attached to a lawsuit against me?
You must deny execution under oath in your answer, or by a separate affidavit based on personal knowledge. Without that sworn denial, the document is treated as authentic and comes into evidence without further proof.
What counts as “execution” of a document under this rule?
Rule 9.2(H) defines it to include a genuine, authorized signature; proper delivery with the intent to be effective; no unauthorized material alteration of the terms; possession of the instrument by the person enforcing it when required; and correctly identified parties.
Can I inspect the original document if only a copy was filed with the pleading?
Yes. Rule 9.2(E) requires the filer to permit inspection of the original on request, with limited exceptions, such as a lost original. Refusing a proper request can bring the same sanctions as a discovery violation.
What happens if the other side forgets to attach a required document?
The court has discretion under Rule 9.2(F) to order compliance, allow an explanation, or let the case proceed without further pleading, and the omission can typically be corrected by amendment.
Source & verification. The rule text is reproduced verbatim from the
official Indiana Rules of Trial Procedure (T.R. 9.2). 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:attach contract to complaint indianaaffidavit of debt indianadebt buyer lawsuit indiana requirementsdenying execution of a document indianatrial rule 9.2proof of signature on written contract indianachain of title debt collection lawsuit indiana