Charles Cannon v. Kristy A. Caldwell
2017 Ind. App. LEXIS 163
| Ind. Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Charles Cannon (Father) and Kristy Caldwell (Mother) divorced in 2011; Mother received custody of two children.
- Dissolution order initially required Father to pay $20/week child support; children also received derivative SSD benefits totaling $186/month (plus $80/month support = $266/month total).
- Father later became ineligible for SSD and began receiving $733/month SSI; derivative benefits to the children ceased and Mother moved to modify support.
- Trial court held an informal hearing, then entered an order increasing Father’s child support to $35/week; Father’s post-judgment motion to reconsider was denied.
- Father filed a late notice of appeal; the transcript of the hearing was unavailable and the parties exchanged Rule 31 statements/affidavit.
- The Court of Appeals determined the modification violated the Indiana Child Support Guidelines because SSI is excluded from gross income for child support calculations and therefore restored the forfeited appeal to decide the merits.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Mother) | Defendant's Argument (Father) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Father’s untimely notice of appeal forfeited appellate review | Father’s appeal is untimely and should be forfeited | Father argued for review; sought restoration due to compelling reasons (manifest injustice) | Court found extraordinarily compelling reason (manifest injustice) to restore appeal and reach merits |
| Whether SSI counts as income for child support calculation | Trial court implicitly treated Father as having income sufficient for $35/week support | SSI is means‑tested public assistance and excluded from "weekly gross income" under the Guidelines; SSI recipients lack means to satisfy support | SSI is excluded; support order of $35/week violates the Indiana Child Support Guidelines |
| Whether manifest injustice can justify deviation from appellate rules | N/A | Father argued the result was manifestly unjust because Guidelines exclude SSI | Court held manifestly unjust result is an "extraordinarily compelling reason" to reach the merits |
| Remedy for guideline violation | Mother sought enforcement of modified amount | Father sought reversal of modification | Court reversed the modification and remanded for proceedings consistent with Guidelines |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Adoption of O.R., 16 N.E.3d 965 (Ind. 2014) (describing when an untimely notice of appeal may be excused and identifying ‘‘extraordinarily compelling reasons’’)
- McGill v. McGill, 801 N.E.2d 1249 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004) (SSI recipients lack means to satisfy child support obligations)
- Cox v. Cox, 654 N.E.2d 275 (Ind. Ct. App. 1995) (describing SSI as a means‑tested welfare program and its effect on contempt/support enforcement)
- Ward v. Ward, 763 N.E.2d 480 (Ind. Ct. App. 2002) (reiterating that SSI recipients cannot be held in contempt for nonpayment of child support)
- Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (2000) (recognizing the parent–child relationship as a fundamental liberty interest)