What Does Indiana Code 9-19-10-7 Say About Seat Belt Evidence?
Why Indiana’s Seat Belt Rule Still Matters for Injured Crash Victims
Key Takeaways: Indiana Code § 9-19-10-7 was rewritten by P.L.49-2024 (House Bill 1090). For causes of action accruing after June 30, 2024, subsection (c) allows seat belt nonuse evidence to mitigate damages for plaintiffs at least 15 years old, with defendants bearing the burden of proof. For claims accruing before July 1, 2024, subsection (b) generally excluded such evidence except in product liability actions involving restraint systems. Subsection (a) remains: failing to buckle up does not constitute "fault" under Indiana’s Comparative Fault Act, IC 34-51-2, and does not limit insurer liability, so belt nonuse cannot push a claimant past the 51% fault bar. A seat belt citation is a Class D infraction with no license points under IC 9-19-10-8.
If you were hurt in a crash and an adjuster claims your recovery will shrink because you were unbuckled, the answer under Indiana law depends on when your claim accrued. Indiana Code § 9-19-10-7 once broadly barred evidence of seat belt nonuse to mitigate damages, but House Bill 1090 changed that rule effective July 1, 2024. What has not changed is subsection (a): failing to buckle up does not constitute "fault" under Indiana’s Comparative Fault Act, IC 34-51-2, and does not limit insurer liability. Understanding this statute can change how you respond when an insurer tries to blame you for your injuries.
If an insurance company is using restraint evidence to pressure you toward a low settlement, the team at Poynter & Bucheri can help. Call (317) 406-7443 or reach out to our team today to discuss your Indiana crash claim.
What the Statute Actually Says About Seat Belt Nonuse
The admissibility rule turns on your accrual date. Under IC 9-19-10-7(b) governing causes of action accruing before July 1, 2024, evidence of seat belt noncompliance generally could not be admitted to mitigate damages, except in product liability situations. For causes of action accruing after June 30, 2024, subsection (c) permits that evidence when the plaintiff was at least 15 years old at accrual, placing the burden on the defendant to prove noncompliance and that compliance would have reduced injuries.
Subsection (a) still closes an important door. IC 9-19-10-7(a) provides that failure to comply with sections 1, 2, or 3.1(a) does not constitute fault under IC 34-51-2 and does not limit insurer liability. Because Indiana allocates responsibility through the comparative fault framework, this language prevents a defendant from assigning you a fault percentage that reduces or eliminates your recovery under the 51% bar.
Together, these provisions draw a line. The at-fault driver still caused the collision, and belt nonuse cannot be converted into a fault percentage. What a defendant may now argue, for newer claims, is that a portion of injuries would have been avoided with a belt, a damages-mitigation argument rather than a liability argument.
Understanding Indiana Code 9-19-10-7 Seat Belt Evidence in Real Claims
Most injured people encounter this issue before a lawsuit is filed. Adjusters routinely raise seat belt nonuse during negotiations, sometimes without distinguishing between claims that accrued before and after the 2024 change. Insurance negotiation is not bound by evidence rules, so an adjuster may float the theory regardless of admissibility.
Knowing the statute gives you leverage. When you or your attorney can point directly to the text of the auto accident statute Indiana applies to restraint use, and to the accrual date that controls, an overstated argument may lose its force.
The rule is only one damages dispute among many. Insurers may also contest causation, pre-existing conditions, treatment gaps, or injury severity. Even where a mitigation argument is available, the defendant must support it with proof, often expert proof.
The Product Liability Exception and the 2024 Rule
The older exception was narrow. For claims governed by the pre-2024 framework, evidence of nonuse could be admitted in a product liability action involving a motor vehicle restraint system, with the defendant required to prove noncompliance, that compliance would have reduced injuries, and the extent of that reduction.
The 2024 amendment is far broader. It is no longer limited to claims targeting the restraint system itself. For causes of action accruing after June 30, 2024, mitigation evidence may be offered in ordinary negligence cases against a careless driver, subject to the defendant’s burden of proof and the plaintiff’s age at accrual.
Why the Version of the Statute Matters
Older codifications and secondary summaries can mislead you. IC 9-19-10-7 has been amended multiple times, including by P.L.121-1993, P.L.1-1998, P.L.214-2007, P.L.262-2013, and most recently P.L.49-2024, the enactment of House Bill 1090 effective July 1, 2024.
The section sits in Title 9 (Motor Vehicles), Article 19, Chapter 10. For the in-force text, the Indiana General Assembly publishes the current Indiana motor vehicle code.
How the 2013 Amendments Changed Cross-References
The 2013 omnibus legislation reshaped the chapter. Effective July 1, 2013, P.L.262-2013 repealed IC 9-19-10-4 and IC 9-19-10-6, and the reference to section 4 no longer appears in IC 9-19-10-7.
This matters when reading older case law. Decisions issued before 2013, and any decision before July 1, 2024, may reference statutory subsections or exclusion rules that no longer apply.
The Underlying Seat Belt Mandate in Indiana
Indiana does require belt use. Since July 1, 2007, occupants 16 and older must be belted in all seating positions in all vehicles. A violation by a person at least 16 years old is a Class D infraction, and no license points are assessed under IC 9-19-10-8.
A traffic infraction is not the same as civil fault. You can receive a citation for not wearing a belt and still pursue damages, because IC 9-19-10-7(a) removes belt nonuse from the comparative fault calculus even after the 2024 change.
| Issue | General Rule Under IC 9-19-10-7 |
|---|---|
| Nonuse offered to reduce damages, claim accruing before July 1, 2024 | Generally inadmissible under the prior subsection (b) |
| Nonuse offered to reduce damages, claim accruing after June 30, 2024 | Admissible under subsection (c) for plaintiffs 15 or older, defendant bears the burden |
| Nonuse as comparative "fault" | Not fault under IC 34-51-2 per subsection (a) |
| Effect on insurer liability | Does not limit insurer liability per subsection (a) |
| Restraint system product liability claim | Evidence admissible, defendant bears the burden |
| Traffic citation for nonuse | Class D infraction, no license points |
💡 Pro Tip: If a police report notes belt nonuse, do not panic. Photograph the vehicle interior, including belt retractors and any loading marks, because that physical documentation can matter later.
Exemptions That Can Surface During Litigation
Not every occupant falls under the chapter. IC 9-19-10-1 lists categories of exempt occupants, including:
- Occupants with a documented medical exemption
- Children covered instead by Indiana’s child restraint law, IC 9-19-11
- Certain commercial and postal vehicle occupants making frequent stops
- Rural postal carriers and newspaper route carriers while making deliveries
- Farm vehicle and emergency vehicle occupants in defined circumstances
Whether an exemption applies is fact-sensitive. The medical exemption requires written documentation from a physician.
Building the Rest of Your Case
The seat belt question is only one piece of a claim. A claimant must still establish duty, breach, causation, and damages under Indiana negligence principles. That means preserving the vehicle, obtaining the crash report, identifying witnesses, and securing consistent medical documentation.
Evidence disappears quickly after a collision. Vehicles get repaired or salvaged, surveillance footage is overwritten, and skid marks wash away. Our overview of what evidence proves fault walks through the categories that carry the most weight in Indianapolis cases.
💡 Pro Tip: Send a written preservation request early if a vehicle’s event data recorder may hold crash data. Once the car is sold for salvage, that information is often gone.
Serious injury cases may call for retained professionals. Accident reconstruction analysts, biomechanical experts, and treating physicians can help connect the crash mechanism to the specific harm you suffered and respond to a defense claim that a belt would have reduced your injuries.
When an Indianapolis Injury Attorney Adds Value
Insurers may respond differently to represented claimants. An Indiana crash claim handled by counsel often involves a documented damages presentation, a legal analysis of admissibility, and a willingness to file suit if negotiations stall. Many attorneys handle these matters on a contingency basis, so representation may be available without upfront payment.
Timing also matters. Indiana’s civil statute of limitations for personal injury is generally two years. Claims involving governmental entities carry separate tort claim notice requirements with much shorter deadlines.
Frequently Asked Questions
1. Can the other driver’s insurance reduce my settlement because I was not buckled?
It depends on when your cause of action accrued. Nonuse is never "fault" under IC 34-51-2, but for claims accruing after June 30, 2024, subsection (c) lets a defendant offer nonuse evidence to argue failure to mitigate damages. For older claims, that evidence was generally inadmissible outside the product liability context.
2. Does the seat belt evidence rule apply to my claim against a negligent driver?
For crashes on or after July 1, 2024, yes, the mitigation evidence may be admitted in an ordinary negligence case if the plaintiff was at least 15 at accrual. Under the prior rule, admissibility was limited to product liability actions involving restraint systems.
3. Who has to prove what?
The defendant. IC 9-19-10-7(c) places the burden on the defendant to prove noncompliance and that compliance would have reduced injuries.
4. Will a seat belt ticket hurt my driving record?
Under IC 9-19-10-8, a violation by a person at least 16 years old is a Class D infraction with no license points assessed. Additional context on Indiana’s occupant protection requirements appears in the state’s passenger restraint law summary, though summaries may not reflect the 2024 amendment.
5. What if I was exempt from wearing a seat belt?
IC 9-19-10-1 identifies categories of exempt occupants, including certain medical, commercial, postal, farm, and emergency situations. Whether an exemption applies depends on documentation and the specific facts.
Protecting Your Recovery After an Indiana Crash
Indiana’s statutory seat belt rule now reflects a split approach: an occupant’s belt decision is still never comparative "fault" and never limits insurer liability, but for claims accruing after June 30, 2024, a defendant may ask a jury to consider belt nonuse when measuring damages. That defense is not automatic, and the defendant must prove both noncompliance and that a belt would have reduced injuries. Because admissibility questions and damages disputes turn on the precise facts and timing of each collision, a general summary cannot substitute for a review of your own case.
If an insurer is questioning your restraint use or minimizing your injuries, Poynter & Bucheri is ready to listen. Call (317) 406-7443 or schedule your free consultation to talk through your options with an Indianapolis injury attorney.
Disclaimer: This content is for informational purposes only and is not legal advice. Every case is unique, and results may vary. Consult an attorney about your specific circumstances.