Christopher A. Toth v. Julia Lynne Noblitt (mem. dec.)
20A03-1705-DR-1030
| Ind. Ct. App. | Oct 17, 2017Background
- Christopher Toth and Julia Noblitt divorced (1998); two daughters: K.T. (b.1993, catastrophically injured in 2006) and A.T. (b.1995).
- K.T. requires constant care; Mother is unemployed due to caregiving. Father has a history of arrearages for support, medical, and educational expenses.
- Trial court (May 6, 2016 and April 10, 2017 orders) awarded Father liability for unreimbursed medical expenses and educational expenses, denied imputation of income to Mother, ordered Father to pay 75% of A.T.’s college/living expenses (A.T. 25%), denied modification of child support, and awarded Mother attorney fees.
- This appeal raised challenges to the college-expense apportionment, denial of modification of support for K.T. after A.T.’s emancipation, admission of a demonstrative exhibit, and the attorney-fee award.
- Appellate court affirmed college-expense allocation and attorney fees, held the trial court erred in denying modification after A.T.’s emancipation, and directed reduction of Father’s weekly support for K.T. to $226 retroactive to March 23, 2016.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Toth) | Defendant's Argument (Noblitt) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Apportionment of A.T.’s college expenses | 75% allocation to Toth is excessive; he cannot afford it and court failed to identify other funding sources | Mother presented evidence of student grants/loans, living costs; student to pay 25% | Affirmed — trial court’s 75/25 split and 2.0 GPA requirement not clearly erroneous |
| Requirement to set GPA/minimum academic standard for aid | Claimed court failed to set minimum GPA | Trial court set 2.0 minimum and required semester grade reports | Affirmed — 2.0 minimum present in order |
| Motion to modify child support after A.T.’s emancipation | Argued support should be modified given A.T. reached 19 | Mother argued no substantial change or other reasons to modify; trial court denied | Reversed — emancipation is substantial change; remanded to reduce weekly support for K.T. to $226 retroactive to March 23, 2016 |
| Award of attorney fees to Mother | Challenged excessive hours, duplicate billing, and claimed no justification | Mother’s financial incapacity and long-standing litigation justified fee award; trial court considered parties’ economic circumstances | Affirmed — trial court did not abuse discretion |
Key Cases Cited
- Winslow v. Fifer, 969 N.E.2d 1087 (Ind. Ct. App. 2012) (standard of review for college-expense apportionment; do not reweigh evidence)
- In re Paternity of Pickett, 44 N.E.3d 756 (Ind. Ct. App. 2015) (educational expenses should be roughly proportional to parents’ incomes absent justification)
- Hensley v. Hensley, 868 N.E.2d 910 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007) (reversed an inequitable apportionment where mother voluntarily unemployed and father had limited ability to pay)
- Patton v. Patton, 48 N.E.3d 17 (Ind. Ct. App. 2015) (emancipation constitutes substantial and continuing changed circumstances warranting modification of support)