Caleb Riggen v. Tammy Riggen
71 N.E.3d 420
| Ind. Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Caleb Riggen (Father) and Tammy Riggen (Mother) share one child; Mother had physical custody after dissolution in 2014.
- Father filed a petition to modify custody; the trial court held a hearing, considered the guardian ad litem (GAL) report, and granted Father’s petition on February 16, 2016.
- Mother filed a motion to correct error and requested further investigation into the GAL report; the trial court stayed its order and asked the GAL for a supplemental report.
- After the GAL supplemented its report and a hearing on the motion, the trial court granted Mother’s motion to correct error and denied Father’s modification petition, but the court’s order stated no reasons for granting relief.
- Father appealed, arguing the trial court abused its discretion by granting the motion without specifying reasons as required by Indiana Trial Rule 59(J).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court abused its discretion by granting Mother’s motion to correct error without stating general reasons as required by Trial Rule 59(J) | Father: The court failed to articulate any reasons for granting corrective relief, violating T.R. 59(J) and warranting reversal | Mother: (No brief filed) — appellee did not respond on appeal | Court: Reversed and remanded because the trial court violated T.R. 59(J); vacated the order and instructed the trial court to specify general reasons on remand |
Key Cases Cited
- Front Row Motors, LLC v. Jones, 5 N.E.3d 753 (Ind. 2014) (appellate court may reverse for prima facie error when appellee fails to brief)
- Trinity Homes, LLC v. Fang, 848 N.E.2d 1065 (Ind. 2006) (definition of prima facie error for appeals without appellee brief)
- Santelli v. Rahmatullah, 993 N.E.2d 167 (Ind. 2013) (standard of review for motion to correct error is abuse of discretion)
- Steele-Giri v. Steele, 51 N.E.3d 119 (Ind. 2016) (burden and heightened standard for modifying child custody)
- Best v. Best, 941 N.E.2d 499 (Ind. 2011) (appellate deference to trial court credibility findings in family law)
- Pickett v. Pickett, 470 N.E.2d 751 (Ind. Ct. App. 1984) (T.R. 59(J) violations may be harmless in some circumstances)
- Hubbard v. Hubbard, 690 N.E.2d 1219 (Ind. Ct. App. 1998) (trial court may alter or vacate its judgment under T.R. 59)
- Comm'r, Dep't of Envtl. Mgmt. v. RLG, Inc., 755 N.E.2d 556 (Ind. 2001) (standard for reversing negative judgments)
- Walker v. Pullen, 943 N.E.2d 349 (Ind. 2011) (presumption of correctness for trial court decisions)