In Re the Marriage of: Amy Steele-Giri v. Brian K. Steele, 40 N.E.3d 513

Mother (Amy Steele-Giri) petitioned to modify physical custody of J.S. (born 2004) and filed a rule to show cause alleging Father (Brian Steele) violated the parties’ Agreed Order establishing joint legal custody and Father’s physical custody (2009 Agreed Order).
Since the Agreed Order: Mother remarried, moved to Oregon, became a stay-at-home mom and had a son (J.S.’s half-brother); Father took a more demanding shift-based job, and his partner Guth works full time.
Under Father’s care, J.S. spent extensive hours in before/after-school care and daycare; school placed/recommended remedial programming (Extended Day Kindergarten; summer school) and J.S. lagged academically by third grade. Father did not inform Mother of many school decisions or provide full school reports; Guth completed registration forms omitting Mother’s contact info.
GAL Christine Miller reported concerns about J.S.’s long days in structured care, the household dynamics (strained relationship with Guth’s daughter), and that J.S. would likely have her own room and more parental time with Mother in Oregon; GAL made no formal custody recommendation.
Trial court denied modification and denied contempt; the court on appeal reversed: it awarded physical custody to Mother, found Father in contempt for willfully failing to comply with joint legal custody information-sharing obligations, and remanded for parenting-time scheduling and possible monetary damages for contempt.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Mother)	Defendant's Argument (Father)	Held
Modification of custody — whether substantial change warrants transfer	Changed circumstances (Mother now stay-at-home in Oregon with half-brother), J.S.’s academic decline tied to long daycare hours, hostile household, Father’s failure to share school/health info—modification is in child’s best interest	Father is a loving, involved parent; deference to trial court; child adjusted to father’s home; changes not so substantial as to warrant transfer	Reversed: appellate court found substantial change in whole environment affecting J.S.; awarded physical custody to Mother and remanded to set parenting time and consider joint legal custody
Rule to show cause / contempt for failing to comply with joint legal custody	Father willfully failed to share major education/health decisions and records, omitted Mother from school contact info, denied parenting time—contempt warranted and damages may be appropriate	Father argued information was available (school portal), failures were not willful, and trial court admonished both parents to improve communication	Reversed: appellate court found Father willfully disobeyed his joint-legal-custody obligations, held him in contempt, and remanded for determination of monetary damages

D.C. v. J.A.C., 977 N.E.2d 951 (Ind. 2012) (deference to trial court factual findings in custody cases)
Kirk v. Kirk, 770 N.E.2d 304 (Ind. 2002) (burden on petitioner to show modification warranted; appellate courts must not reweigh evidence)
Baxendale v. Raich, 878 N.E.2d 1252 (Ind. 2008) (finality and deference in custody matters)
Jarrell v. Jarrell, 5 N.E.3d 1186 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014) (change must be judged in context of whole environment; effect on child determines substantiality)
Bryant v. Bryant, 693 N.E.2d 976 (Ind. Ct. App. 1998) (remarriage considered but not dispositive in custody changes)
Sabo v. Sabo, 858 N.E.2d 1064 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006) (parental guidance needs may shift at onset of adolescence; relevance to custody decisions)
Crowl v. Berryhill, 678 N.E.2d 828 (Ind. Ct. App. 1997) (knowledge of order + willful disobedience supports contempt)
Phillips v. Delks, 880 N.E.2d 713 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008) (monetary damages may be awarded after contempt finding)
Best v. Best, 941 N.E.2d 499 (Ind. 2011) (appellate courts must defer to trial court on witness credibility in custody disputes)
Sexton v. Sedlak, 946 N.E.2d 1177 (Ind. Ct. App. 2011) (when trial court enters findings, those findings control issues they cover)