Child Support

Appeal affirms denial of emancipation; includes mother in support

June 15, 2012
Dave Stafford
The Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed a Floyd Superior Court ruling denying emancipation of a 19-year-old, but sent the case back to the trial court for recalculation of her support payments to include her mother as well as her father.
More

Daughter's emancipation upheld; COA advises on forthcoming child-support changes

June 8, 2012
Dave Stafford
A 20-year-old woman will remain emancipated from her divorced parents after the Indiana Court Appeals on Friday upheld a Howard Circuit Court order.
More

Court rules on inclusion of survivor benefits in child support obligation

May 31, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Court of Appeals was faced with a situation not specifically addressed in the Child Support Guidelines and Commentary or in any Indiana case – whether Social Security survivor benefits paid to children due to the death of a custodial parent’s subsequent spouse are or should be included in the custodial parent’s weekly gross income.
More

Court rules on child support, parenting time modifications

March 27, 2012
Michael Hoskins
The Indiana Court of Appeals has ruled on a case involving parenting time and child support issues between a mother and father.
More

Justices uphold probation revocation for child support non-payment

March 23, 2012
Michael Hoskins
A trial judge was correct in revoking a man’s probation based on his failure to pay weekly child support as a condition of his probation, the Indiana Supreme Court has ruled.
More

Nonsupport of dependent enhancement not based on number of children

February 17, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
The 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.
More

Court does not have subject matter jurisdiction over child support

February 8, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
In 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.”
More

Comment sought on proposed changes to parenting time guidelines

February 8, 2012
IL Staff
The Indiana Judicial Center’s Domestic Relations Committee is seeking comment on proposed changes to the parenting time guidelines, which includes parenting coordination guidelines.
More

Bill would change child support statute

January 18, 2012
Jenny Montgomery
Senate Bill 18 could reduce arrearages.
More

Judges examine double jeopardy issues in child support case

January 6, 2012
Michael Hoskins

The 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.

More

Judges divided over prison term for probation violation

October 25, 2011
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Court of Appeals was divided in affirming a man’s revocation of probation and order that he serve 12 years of his suspended sentence, with the dissenting judge finding this decision will penalize his child who is relying on support payments.
More

Appellate court tackles child support issues

October 12, 2011
Jennifer Nelson
In 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.
More

Justices take 3 cases

September 6, 2011
IL Staff
The 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.
More

Casino winnings pay child support

August 17, 2011
Michael Hoskins
Indiana’s casinos have blocked payouts to hundreds of state gamblers who are behind on their child support payments during the past year.
More

Determining dependency in child support

August 17, 2011
Michael Hoskins
A new law merges what guidelines had previously only recommended.
More

COA upholds $12 garnishment

July 13, 2011
Jennifer Nelson
A Miami Circuit Court did not err in its interpretation of a statute involving garnishment of wages when ruling a company was correctly withholding only $12.17 from an employee, held the Indiana Court of Appeals Wednesday.
More

Court examines 'entry' of guilty plea withdrawal motions

July 7, 2011
Michael Hoskins
The Court of Appeals has ruled that a man convicted of not paying more than $22,000 in child support wrongly interpreted state law about withdrawing his guilty plea, and that the trial judge correctly prevented the man from doing so because he didn’t file a request in writing or justify the withdrawal.
More

Proposed rules provide uniformity for parenting coordinators

May 25, 2011
Jennifer Nelson
The use of parenting coordinators is increasing around the state. But depending on where you are in Indiana, the authority of the parenting coordinator – PC – may differ. In an effort to create uniformity, rules are being proposed that would regulate the role and authority of PCs.
More

Mother's rights at issue in COA reversal

May 20, 2011
Michael Hoskins
The Indiana Court of Appeals has reversed a paternity ruling from Vanderburgh County, finding that the judge should have taken a second look at the case after a mother wasn’t given a chance to be properly heard on custody of her child.
More

Justices take felony murder, child support cases

May 9, 2011
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Supreme Court has granted transfer to two cases - a convicted murder’s appeal and a case involving child support nonpayment.
More

Judges split on child support modification

March 25, 2011
Jennifer Nelson
An Indiana Court of Appeals judge dissented from his colleagues, finding their decision regarding child support promotes “formalism over fairness and legalism over common sense.”
More

COA: State didn't meet burden for probation revocation

March 23, 2011
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Court of Appeals has held – with a few exceptions – that a trial court may revoke probation for not satisfying a financial obligation only if the state proves by a preponderance of the evidence there is less than full payment and the probationer submitted that smaller payment recklessly, knowingly, or intentionally.
More

Appeal questions 'enrollment,' self-supporting standards for emancipation

March 18, 2011
Michael Hoskins
In tackling a child support case involving a teenager’s emancipation, Indiana Court of Appeals judges disagree on what state statute defines as “enrolled” in college. One judge believes the majority wrongly reweighed evidence in this case to come to its decision.
More

Encouraging diversity in CASA programs

March 16, 2011
Rebecca Berfanger
Having volunteers and staff who can relate to families that interact with Court Appointed Special Advocates programs has proven invaluable to a number of county-level CASA programs in Indiana. Indianapolis-based Child Advocates Inc. received the National CASA Inclusion Award for its inclusion and diversity plan March 20 at the National CASA conference in Chicago.
More

COA orders a new child support order

February 25, 2011
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Court of Appeals reversed the denial of a father’s petition to modify child support. The judges held he didn’t waive his argument for modification because he made a prima facie showing he qualified for a modification under one subsection of the statute, even though he argued before the trial court that he qualified based on the other subsection.
More
Page  << 1 2 3 4 5 6 >> pager
Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. OK, take notice. Those wondering just how corrupt the Indiana system is can see the picture in this post. Attorney Donald James did not criticize any judges, he merely, it would seem, caused some clients to file against him and then ignored his own defense. James thus disrespected the system via ignoring all and was also ordered to reimburse the commission $525.88 for the costs of prosecuting the first case against him. Yes, nearly $526 for all the costs, the state having proved it all. Ouch, right? Now consider whistleblower and constitutionalist and citizen journalist Paul Ogden who criticized a judge, defended himself in such a professional fashion as to have half the case against him thrown out by the ISC and was then handed a career ending $10,000 bill as "half the costs" of the state crucifying him. http://www.theindianalawyer.com/ogden-quitting-law-citing-high-disciplinary-fine/PARAMS/article/35323 THE TAKEAWAY MESSAGE for any who have ears to hear ... resist Star Chamber and pay with your career ... welcome to the Indiana system of (cough) justice.

  2. GMA Ranger, I, too, was warned against posting on how the Ind govt was attempting to destroy me professionally, and visit great costs and even destitution upon my family through their processing. No doubt the discussion in Indy today is likely how to ban me from this site (I expect I soon will be), just as they have banned me from emailing them at the BLE and Office of Bar Admission and ADA coordinator -- or, if that fails, whether they can file a complaint against my Kansas or SCOTUS law license for telling just how they operate and offering all of my files over the past decade to any of good will. The elitist insiders running the Hoosier social control mechanisms realize that knowledge and a unified response will be the end of their unjust reign. They fear exposure and accountability. I was banned for life from the Indiana bar for questioning government processing, that is, for being a whistleblower. Hoosier whistleblowers suffer much. I have no doubt, Gma Ranger, of what you report. They fear us, but realize as long as they keep us in fear of them, they can control us. Kinda like the kids' show Ants. Tyrannical governments the world over are being shaken by empowered citizens. Hoosiers dealing with The Capitol are often dealing with tyranny. Time to rise up: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/jan/17/governments-struggling-to-retain-trust-of-citizens-global-survey-finds Back to the Founders! MAGA!

  3. Science is showing us the root of addiction is the lack of connection (with people). Criminalizing people who are lonely is a gross misinterpretation of what data is revealing and the approach we must take to combat mental health. Harsher crimes from drug dealers? where there is a demand there is a market, so make it legal and encourage these citizens to be functioning members of a society with competitive market opportunities. Legalize are "drugs" and quit wasting tax payer dollars on frivolous incarceration. The system is destroying lives and doing it in the name of privatized profits. To demonize loneliness and destroy lives in the land of opportunity is not freedom.

  4. Good luck, but as I have documented in three Hail Mary's to the SCOTUS, two applications (2007 & 2013),a civil rights suit and my own kicked-to-the-curb prayer for mandamus. all supported in detailed affidavits with full legal briefing (never considered), the ISC knows that the BLE operates "above the law" (i.e. unconstitutionally) and does not give a damn. In fact, that is how it was designed to control the lawyers. IU Law Prof. Patrick Baude blew the whistle while he was Ind Bar Examiner President back in 1993, even he was shut down. It is a masonic system that blackballs those whom the elite disdain. Here is the basic thrust:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackballing When I asked why I was initially denied, the court's foremost jester wrote back that the ten examiners all voted, and I did not gain the needed votes for approval (whatever that is, probably ten) and thus I was not in .. nothing written, no explanation, just go away or appeal ... and if you appeal and disagree with their system .. proof positive you lack character and fitness. It is both arbitrary and capricious by its very design. The Hoosier legal elites are monarchical minded, and rejected me for life for ostensibly failing to sufficiently respect man's law (due to my stated regard for God's law -- which they questioned me on, after remanding me for a psych eval for holding such Higher Law beliefs) while breaking their own rules, breaking federal statutory law, and violating federal and state constitutions and ancient due process standards .. all well documented as they "processed me" over many years.... yes years ... they have few standards that they will not bulldoze to get to the end desired. And the ISC knows this, and they keep it in play. So sad, And the fed courts refuse to do anything, and so the blackballing show goes on ... it is the Indy way. My final experience here: https://www.scribd.com/document/299040062/Brown-ind-Bar-memo-Pet-cert I will open my files to anyone interested in seeing justice dawn over Indy. My cases are an open book, just ask.

  5. Looks like 2017 will be another notable year for these cases. I have a Grandson involved in a CHINS case that should never have been. He and the whole family are being held hostage by CPS and the 'current mood' of the CPS caseworker. If the parents disagree with a decision, they are penalized. I, along with other were posting on Jasper County Online News, but all were quickly warned to remove posts. I totally understand that some children need these services, but in this case, it was mistakes, covered by coorcement of father to sign papers, lies and cover-ups. The most astonishing thing was within 2 weeks of this child being placed with CPS, a private adoption agency was asking questions regarding child's family in the area. I believe a photo that was taken by CPS manager at the very onset during the CHINS co-ocerment and the intent was to make money. I have even been warned not to post or speak to anyone regarding this case. Parents have completed all requirements, met foster parents, get visitation 2 days a week, and still the next court date is all the way out till May 1, which gives them(CPS) plenty of to time make further demands (which I expect) No trust of these 'seasoned' case managers, as I have already learned too much about their dirty little tricks. If they discover that I have posted here, I expect they will not be happy and penalized parents again. Still a Hostage.

ADVERTISEMENT