Family Law
Trial court erred in modifying custody in favor of father
March 30, 2012
Jennifer NelsonA trial court’s decision to grant a father’s motion to modify custody and prevent his ex-wife from relocating
with their son was clearly erroneous, the Indiana Court of Appeals concluded in reversing the decision. The lower court ruling
virtually ignored the immense benefit the mother’s new position in Tennessee would bring to her and her son.
MoreAppellate judges disagree about dismissal of paternity petition
March 29, 2012
Jenny MontgomeryThe Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed a trial court in dismissing a paternity petition, but one judge dissented, saying the
ruling now leaves the child with no legally recognized father.
MoreJudges affirm change in custody
March 19, 2012
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Court of Appeals has upheld the modification of a custody order giving the father primary custody of his son,
finding the trial court didn’t abuse its discretion in deciding that the boy’s physical and mental/academic maturation
constituted a substantial change warranting the change in custody.
MoreJudges reverse adoption completed while mother was out of state
March 14, 2012
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Court of Appeals has reversed the grant of an adoption petition by a child’s paternal grandparents, finding
the matter was surrounded by irregular and fraudulent circumstances.
MoreWomen's Bench Bar Retreat to host COA
February 27, 2012
IL StaffThe Court of Appeals of Indiana will hear oral argument in In RE: The Paternity of K.S. at noon March 2, at Culver
Cove Resort & Conference Center.
MoreNonsupport of dependent enhancement not based on number of children
February 17, 2012
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Supreme Court ruled Thursday that under Indiana Code 35-46-1-5(a), the enhancement of nonsupport of a dependent
child to a Class C felony because of an arrearage of $15,000 or more is triggered by the dollar amount owed, regardless of
how many children the parent has.
MoreOn rehearing, COA affirms original opinion
February 14, 2012
Jenny MontgomeryOn petition for rehearing, the state Department of Child Services claims that the appellate court imposed an undue burden
upon the agency by recognizing that DCS has to make a prima facie showing regarding current conditions before the parent is
obliged to come forward with evidence.
MoreMother's prior statement undermines argument on appeal
February 14, 2012
Jenny MontgomeryA mother who appealed a court’s order acknowledging that her ex-husband is the father of her child cannot prove that
the court abused its discretion.
MoreCourt does not have subject matter jurisdiction over child support
February 8, 2012
Jennifer NelsonIn addressing whether a trial court in Indiana erred in dismissing a woman’s petition for modification of child support
previously entered in Maryland, the Indiana Court of Appeals noted an incongruity in the statutory scheme that leads to the
“somewhat absurd result in this case.”
MoreComment sought on proposed changes to parenting time guidelines
February 8, 2012
IL StaffThe Indiana Judicial Center’s Domestic Relations Committee is seeking comment on proposed changes to the parenting time
guidelines, which includes parenting coordination guidelines.
MoreCollaborative divorce offers closure for clients, demands less attorney time
January 18, 2012
Jenny MontgomeryAttorneys say collaborative divorce works for clients who hope to avoid the courtroom.
MoreBill would change child support statute
January 18, 2012
Jenny MontgomerySenate Bill 18 could reduce arrearages.
MoreDCS recognized with national award
January 11, 2012
IL StaffThe Indiana Department of Child Services has won one of four Casey Family Programs “Excellence in Leadership”
awards for 2011. The award is given to those involved in child welfare who work to improve the lives of children and families.
MoreJudges examine double jeopardy issues in child support case
January 6, 2012
Michael HoskinsThe Indiana Court of Appeals has found a man’s three convictions on non-payment of child support for his three children don't violate double jeopardy principles, even though that issue is currently pending in another case before the Indiana Supreme Court.
Supreme Court gives $160,000 for family court projects
December 28, 2011
IL StaffSixteen Indiana counties will share $160,000 in grant money from the Indiana Supreme Court to support their local family court
projects.
MoreNotre Dame to organize workshop on families and the law
December 21, 2011
IL StaffThe University of Notre Dame has been chosen as the U.S. partner in a British initiative that involves an international network
considering the intersection of families and the state from interdisciplinary and comparative perspectives.
MoreAppellate court finds mother wasn't in contempt
November 9, 2011
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Court of Appeals agreed with a mother that the Clark Circuit Court erred in finding her in contempt for not putting
her teenage daughter on a plane to Florida to visit the teen’s father over Christmas break. The appellate court did
agree with the trial court that the mom should have to pay for another flight to visit the father.
MoreAppellate court tackles child support issues
October 12, 2011
Jennifer NelsonIn three opinions released Wednesday, the Indiana Court of Appeals ruled on child support issues – the application of
Social Security benefits to an arrearage and whether two fathers who were incarcerated for not paying child support could
have their support obligations modified.
MoreGuidance offered on incarcerated parents' attendance at termination hearings
October 11, 2011
Michael HoskinsScolding the Indiana Department of Child Services for how it handled a parental termination case, the Indiana Supreme Court
has found an incarcerated mother’s due process rights were not violated when she did not receive adequate notice about
pending proceedings that would affect her rights as a parent or when she was not allowed to attend the hearings.
MoreFoster families get in free to Marengo Cave
October 6, 2011
IL StaffThanks to a partnership between Marengo Cave and the Indiana Department of Child Services, foster parents and their foster,
biological and stepchildren will be able to get in to Marengo Cave’s guided walking tours for free.
MoreIndiana makes gains in permanent placement
September 14, 2011
Jenny MontgomeryThe state sees improvement, but aims to do better.
MoreJustices take 3 cases
September 6, 2011
IL StaffThe Indiana Supreme Court has granted transfer to three cases, including one that led to a split in the lower appellate court
in a child support case.
MoreGrandmother can't petition for visitation
September 1, 2011
Jennifer NelsonA grandmother has lost her right to petition for visitation rights after her son’s parental rights were terminated,
so the trial court was correct in dismissing her petition, the Indiana Court of Appeals held Thursday.
MoreCOA: Aunt and uncle have no standing for visitation petition
August 29, 2011
Jennifer NelsonIndiana statutes and caselaw do not allow for aunts or uncles of a child to petition for visitation, the Indiana Court of
Appeals held Monday.
MoreDCS announces new foster care reimbursement rates
August 19, 2011
Following a lawsuit filed by foster parents after the Indiana Department of Child Services announced in 2009 that it was going
to decrease the foster care per diem by 10 percent, the department announced Friday that it has come up with new reimbursement
rates beginning Jan. 1, 2012.
More
Sponsored by
on Facebook & Twitter
on Facebook & Twitter
Indiana Lawyer on Facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Court Calendar
-
May 23, 2012 Covered Bridge Homeowners Association vs. Town of Sellersburg, Indiana - 5/23/12
-
June 1, 2012 Brotherhood Mutual Insurance Co., et al. v. Michiana Contracting, et al. - 6/1/12
-
June 12, 2012 State of Indiana Military Department, et al. v. Continental Electric Co.
-
June 19, 2012 The City of Indianapolis v. National Trust Insurance Co., et al.
Indiana Lawyer Featured Advertisers
ADVERTISEMENT
Back to TopCopyright © All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy | Terms of Use.
Design, CMS, Hosting & Web Development :: ePublishing.
Additional Hosting & Delivery by
G. Michael Witte letter states he's suspended for three years. The case that got him suspended is identical to my estate case, including havin the Late Judge Deiter recuse himself because Newman had a conflict of interest with the judge. His Modus Operandi is nearly identical.
SIGNED BY G. MICHAEL WITTE EXECUTIVE SECRETARY INDIANA SUPREME COURT DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION DATED MAY 17, 2012.
Your 6th complaint against Lawrence T. Newman filed on 4/12/2012. On 1/31/12, the Indiana Supreme Court entered an order suspending Lawrence T. Newman’s law license for a period of three years. More important, even after three years, Lawrence Todd Newman will not get his license back unless and until he goes through a separate proceeding to prove that he is fit to practice law. This is not an easy process, and the burden is upon Lawrence T. Newman to prove by clear and convincing evidence that he is fit to return to practice.
Because of the length of Lawrence T. Newman’s license suspension and the fact he may never succeed in getting his law license reinstated, we are not opening an investigation file at this time.
Should Lawrence T. Newman seek reinstatement in the future, we will open your file and ask Lawrence T. Newman to address your grievance as part of his burden of proving fitness. We have attempted to notify Lawrence T. Newman that this will be required of him.
It may disappoint you to hear that we will be doing nothing on your grievance at this time. However, the most our office can ever accomplish is to take away a lawyer’s license to practice law. We have already done that, albeit as a result of misconduct in cases other than your own. It makes better sense for our office to focus its limited resources on cases where the lawyers are still actively practicing law.
Is there any justice in the Marion County Superior Court Civil Division? I am the unfortunate victim of a retaliatory lawsuit brought by Lawrence Todd Newman, the attorney from an estate case on which I worked as a unsupervised personal representative in 2006. The contract agreement for that case stated that the estate would be responsible for all attorney fees, but Newman refused to close the nearly insolvent estate when my duties were complete and his fees were paid. Instead, he tried to extort additional attorney fees from me by keeping the case open to address a wrongful death claim, despite the estate’s heir’s lack of interest in pursuing it and an expert doctor’s opinion that it would not be worth doing so. He also knowingly deceived me into believing that a “closing statement” was needed to close the estate, even though this requirement had actually been waived by the estate’s heir. The heir’s attorney filed a motion to have Newman removed from the case. After the court closed the probate case with prejudice (barred from further litigation) Newman illegally re-opened the case in another courtroom.
As a result of complaints filed against him for these and similar actions, Newman has been suspended from practicing law for 18 months by the Indiana Disciplinary Commission. In retaliation, he has filed suit against me demanding additional attorney fees for the 2006 estate case, despite the fact that I made no agreement stating that I would pay any fees from my own assets on behalf of the estate. This lawsuit violates the rules of ethics, due process of law, and equal protection of law. Newman has been allowed to file ridiculous pleadings at an alarming rate and has been supported by a biased court system. Judge Carroll refuses to recuse himself from the case despite the fact that, by his own admission, he intends to grant Newman sanctions regardless of the evidence. When my former counsel discovered that the previous judge on the case, Judge Sosin, was a long-time close friend of Newman’s family, Judge Carroll commented for the record during a hearing that Judge Sosin in so many words “he finds the door “was weak for recusing himself from the case as a result of this obvious conflict of interest.
This case is a public policy issue. Statutes put in place to protect unsupervised personal representatives in probate matters are being ignored. This case will affect thousands of individuals involved in probating and the personal representation of estates. Justice cannot possibly be served as long as a biased judge is allowed to defend a “vexatious litigant,” as Newman has been described by Judge Logan in Bradenton, Florida court. If there is any justice in the Marion County Superior Court Civil Division, this case against me will be dismissed with prejudice.
Every affront to decency and every style adopted by criminals is not per se a constituttional violation. Only fools believe or espouse that.
This was an unnecessary change in law, a needless fiddling with a tax that impacted very very few hoosiers, but one that erodes a tax base benefitting very many hoosiers. Just because some people wanted to chalk up a "tax cut" on their legislative brag-list, and didnt give a fig about replacing the revenue any other way. Really stupid. I am a republican my whole life and this just shames me like hell. I have to use a fake name over this because I know my fellow republicans are all brain washed over tax cutting too.