Indiana GU and GM Probate Case Types Explained

Two Case Types, Very Different Consequences

When you file a probate matter in Indiana related to an incapacitated adult, the case type designation you choose determines whether the individual ends up in the state's public Guardianship Registry. That distinction matters more than most families realize at filing time.

Indiana probate courts use two primary case type designations for matters involving incapacitated adults: GU (Guardianship) and GM (Miscellaneous Probate). Using the wrong one can either unnecessarily publicize someone's disability status or fail to trigger the monitoring safeguards designed to protect them.

GU: Standard Guardianship Cases

The GU designation is used when you're petitioning the court to appoint a permanent, limited, or temporary guardian over an incapacitated adult. This is the standard filing for guardianship of the person, guardianship of the estate, or both.

Filing under GU triggers several automatic consequences:

• Guardianship Registry inclusion. The individual is added to Indiana's statewide electronic Guardianship Registry, which is maintained by the Indiana Supreme Court's Office of Judicial Administration and currently links 89 counties. This isn't optional — the court won't issue Letters of Guardianship without a completed Guardianship Registry Information Sheet filed alongside the petition.

• Ongoing monitoring. The Registry provides alerts and reports that can help the court follow up on past-due filings, including the 90-day inventory, the biennial accounting, and any court-ordered reports.

• Public record implications. While the Physician's Report and Registry Information Sheet are filed confidentially under the Access to Court Records (ACR) rules, the petition itself and the guardianship order are public record. Anyone searching the court's online docket can see that the individual is under guardianship.

The standard filing fee for a GU case is $177.

GM: Miscellaneous Probate Cases

The GM designation covers probate matters that don't involve appointing a permanent guardian. This includes:

• Protective proceedings under IC § 29-3-4 — single-transaction court orders authorizing a specific action (like establishing a Special Needs Trust or approving a particular contract) without creating an ongoing guardianship
• Single-transaction orders where someone needs court authority for one specific purpose but doesn't need a guardian managing their life

The critical difference: a GM filing does not place the individual in the Guardianship Registry. The person's privacy is preserved because no ongoing guardian-ward relationship is being created. The proceeding does not create an ongoing guardianship or trigger guardianship monitoring and biennial guardian-reporting requirements, and it has no Guardianship Registry entry.

This matters for families who need a one-time court order — say, to authorize a Special Needs Trust that protects an individual's Medicaid eligibility — but don't want or need the full apparatus of guardianship. Using GM keeps the proceeding narrowly scoped and off the Registry.

Guardian of the Person vs. Guardian of the Estate

Within the GU case type, Indiana law distinguishes between two types of authority a guardian can hold. The court can grant one or both:

Guardian of the person controls decisions about the ward's daily life — medical treatment, residential placement, personal care, and safety. This guardian decides where the person lives, what medical procedures they receive, and how their daily needs are met. A guardian of the person typically does not need to post a fiduciary bond.

Guardian of the estate controls the ward's finances and property — bank accounts, investments, real estate, government benefits. This guardian may be required to post a surety bond, file a detailed asset inventory within 90 days (or sooner under local rules), and submit biennial financial accountings to the court.

The distinction is legally significant because many people need help in only one domain. A person who manages their daily routine independently but can't handle complex financial decisions might need a guardian of the estate only. Someone who makes sound financial choices but can't manage their own medical care might need a guardian of the person only.

When the court grants limited authority over just one domain, the individual retains their rights in the other. This is a less-restrictive outcome than plenary guardianship, which grants authority over the person and/or estate and strips the individual of most civil rights.

Choosing the Right Designation

The decision tree is straightforward:

• Need ongoing authority to make decisions for an incapacitated adult? → GU case, specifying whether you need guardianship of the person, the estate, or both
• Need a one-time court order for a specific transaction? → GM case
• Need both a specific transaction and ongoing authority? → GU case (the transaction can be included in the guardianship order)

Filing under the wrong case type creates problems. Using GU for a one-time protective order unnecessarily registers the person and triggers ongoing reporting requirements. Using GM for what's really an ongoing guardianship means the court's monitoring infrastructure doesn't activate, and the guardian operates without oversight.

If you're unsure which designation applies to your situation, the Indiana Guardianship & Alternatives Guide walks through both case types with the specific statutory references and explains when court involvement is necessary at all — many families find that out-of-court alternatives like supported decision-making agreements or powers of attorney eliminate the need for either filing.

See more Indiana guides →