In the Matter of the Paternity of B.C., M.B. and N.S. v. J.C.
9 N.E.3d 745
Ind. Ct. App.2014Background
- B.C., born 2010, lived with M.B. and N.S. (the Guardians); Marion Superior Court (Probate) appointed them guardians by agreed entry on July 31, 2012.
- On December 19–20, 2012 J.C. filed a paternity petition in Montgomery Circuit Court and an agreed order the next day established him as B.C.’s biological father.
- Guardians later filed adoption and guardianship-related filings in Marion County (adoption petition filed May 20, 2013) and sought consolidation/transfer of the paternity/custody matters to Marion.
- Montgomery Circuit Court denied transfer, heard evidence, and on July 5, 2013 entered a custody and parenting-time order awarding physical custody to the Guardians and joint legal custody to J.C. and M.B.
- Marion Probate Court dismissed the guardianship and adoption petitions on August 6, 2013; Guardians appealed both courts’ orders, consolidated on appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Guardians' Argument | J.C.'s Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Marion Probate or Montgomery Circuit had jurisdiction over custody after overlapping filings | Adoption petition in Marion vested exclusive jurisdiction there under I.C. § 31-19-2-14; Montgomery should have transferred or relinguished jurisdiction (risk of conflicting orders) | Montgomery (juvenile/paternity court) had jurisdiction over paternity and related custody under I.C. § 31-30-1-1(3); Guardians waived objection by not citing the adoption statute below | Where petition for adoption and paternity were pending concurrently, adoption court (Marion Probate) had exclusive jurisdiction over the child; Montgomery’s July 5 custody order was void as to custody; Marion erred in dismissing guardianship and adoption without following statutory procedures; appellate court reverses and remands |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Marriage of Huss, 888 N.E.2d 1238 (Ind. 2008) (a court is precluded from deciding custody when the subject was first properly before another court)
- In re Paternity of Fox, 514 N.E.2d 638 (Ind. Ct. App. 1987) (once jurisdiction obtained, it is retained to exclusion of equal courts for same subject matter)
- In re Adoption of A.N.S., 741 N.E.2d 780 (Ind. Ct. App. 2001) (paternity often must be determined where adoption pending; adoption and paternity courts have concurrent jurisdiction)
- In re Adoption of Unborn Child of B.W., 908 N.E.2d 586 (Ind. 2009) (interpreting I.C. § 31-19-2-14(a) and emphasizing consolidation where adoption and paternity proceedings are concurrent)
- Sanchez v. Thanos, 780 N.E.2d 1203 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003) (exclusive jurisdiction in one forum divests subject-matter jurisdiction from another court)