09/18/2026
A clarification about the September 22 LaPorte County Plan Commission meeting and the agenda item concerning hunting:
The posted agenda does not identify a proposed hunting ban, a county hunting-permit system, a change to Indiana DNR seasons or licensing, or a proposed new zoning ordinance.
It lists an attorney update under “New Business” titled:
“Update on Court of Appeals Decision Regarding Hunting and the Inclusive Type Nature of the Zoning Ordinance.”
“New Business” is simply the agenda section where the item appears. Based on the agenda wording and the Court of Appeals decision itself, this appears to be a legal update, not a scheduled vote or public hearing on a new hunting restriction.
The case is Kenneth and Laura Nirenberg v. Staci Reuer, Indiana Court of Appeals No. 25A-CT-3139, decided May 27, 2026.
In simple terms, a landowner allowed a hunter to hunt from a deer stand on her approximately two-acre property. The property was in a residential zoning district. The hunter shot a deer, the deer ran onto a neighboring property, and the hunter later entered the neighbors’ property to retrieve it. The neighboring landowners sued.
The trial court initially dismissed all claims against the landowner before trial through summary judgment. The neighbors appealed. The Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed some of the dismissal but reversed it on the negligence-related claims and sent those claims back for further proceedings.
The Court of Appeals did not rule that the landowner is automatically liable. It did not create a county hunting license. It did not change Indiana DNR regulations, hunting seasons, bag limits, or firearm laws. It did not impose a countywide prohibition on hunting.
What the court did address was the County’s zoning language.
LaPorte County’s Joint Zoning Ordinance is described as an “inclusive-type” ordinance. That means a use must be specifically and expressly permitted by the ordinance; if it is not listed as permitted, it is not allowed.
The Court of Appeals found that hunting was not listed as a permitted use in the residential zoning district involved in this case. For purposes of deciding whether the landowner could claim protection under Indiana’s Recreational Use Statute, the Court concluded that allowing hunting there was contrary to the zoning ordinance.
That conclusion mattered because the Recreational Use Statute generally limits a landowner’s liability connected with recreational activities such as hunting. However, the statute does not excuse liability for an owner’s malicious or illegal acts. The Court held that the statute could not automatically protect the landowner at the summary-judgment stage when the hunting allegedly conflicted with the applicable zoning ordinance.
The Court also addressed Indiana’s constitutional right to hunt. It noted that the constitutional provision does not prevent the application of laws concerning property rights and trespass. In other words, state regulation of hunting can coexist with local land-use rules, property boundaries, and trespass law.
This decision is a memorandum decision, which means it is not binding statewide precedent. Still, it directly discusses LaPorte County’s own zoning ordinance in a LaPorte County dispute. That makes an attorney update to the Plan Commission reasonable and important.
The responsible question is not whether the County is trying to take away anyone’s hunting rights or create a new permit system. The question is what the County’s existing zoning language means, how it applies in particular zoning districts, and whether clarification is needed after the Court of Appeals addressed it.
Anyone interested in hunting, property rights, zoning, trespass, or neighborhood land-use issues should read the actual agenda item and the actual decision before assuming that a new restriction is being proposed.
Court of Appeals decision:
https://law.justia.com/cases/indiana/court-of-appeals/2026/25a-ct-03139.html
