In Re: The Marriage of: Caleb E. Campbell v. Anna P. Campbell
2013 Ind. App. LEXIS 459
| Ind. Ct. App. | 2013Background
- Father and Mother married in June 2005; they have two children and Mother adopted Z., Father’s biological son from a prior relationship.
- Dissolution Petition filed February 11, 2011; temporary relief granted April 1, 2011 granting shared custody and specific financial arrangements.
- Evidentiary hearings occurred in July–August 2012; September 11, 2012 decree awarded Mother sole legal/physical custody of the three children.
- Court ordered extensive family therapy for Father, Mother, the children, the Maternal Grandmother, and Paternal Grandparents.
- Trial court found significant factors: Mother as primary caretaker, child adjustments, health considerations, and history of domestic issues; relocation deemed insignificant.
- This appeal challenges custody, required family therapy for grandparents, and division of marital property, including Pell Grant funds.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Custody award—was sole custody to Mother appropriate? | Father argues Z. requires special attention and care and that Mother favored over time. | Mother contends she has been primary caregiver and trial court properly weighed best interests. | Yes; custody to Mother affirmed. |
| Order requiring grandparents to attend family therapy—personal jurisdiction issue? | Father argues the court lacked jurisdiction over Paternal Grandparents and Maternal Grandmother. | Mother asserts waivers and broader equitable authority to resolve family dynamics. | Reversed; remand to modify decree to exclude those grandparents from therapy. |
| Division of marital property—was the Pell Grant handled correctly? | Father contends Pell Grant funds were his separate property and should be offset to him. | Mother argues funds were used for household expenses and not Father’s sole property; value not proven. | Reversed and remanded to allocate Pell Grant funds to Father and adjust decree. |
Key Cases Cited
- Trost-Steffen v. Steffen, 772 N.E.2d 500 (Ind. Ct. App. 2002) (custody determinations receive deference; Solomon-like decisions encouraged)
- Beard v. Beard, 758 N.E.2d 1019 (Ind. Ct. App. 2001) (one-pot theory of marital property division; all property subject to division)
- Thompson v. Thompson, 811 N.E.2d 888 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004) (marital estate closes on petition file date; post-petition assets generally not included)
- In re Marriage of Church, 424 N.E.2d 1078 (Ind. Ct. App. 1981) (proof burden in asset division; value must be shown for challenged items)
- Keown v. Keown, 883 N.E.2d 865 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008) (Pell Grants and their treatment in dissolution proceedings)
- Wanner v. Hutchcroft, 888 N.E.2d 260 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008) (strong presumption of equal division; must rebut with statutory factors)