In the Matter of the Adoption of A.A. and L.A. (Minor Children) J.B. and S.B. v. R.C. and N.C., 51 N.E.3d 380

In 2012 J.B. and S.B. (Parents/Adoptive Parents) petitioned to adopt A.A. and L.A.; maternal grandparents (R.C. and N.C.) sought and were granted structured grandparent visitation (one weekend/month, two weeks in summer, special occasions).
Parents initially permitted some visitation but after May 2012 ceased all contact and refused court-ordered make-up visits; Grandparents filed multiple contempt petitions and fee requests.
The trial court (after remand and supplemental findings) found Parents in contempt for willfully disobeying the visitation orders, ordered make-up visits, and previously awarded $2,000 in attorney fees; Parents continued to deny visitation.
After consolidated hearings (2014–2015), Special Judge Nation found Parents in contempt again, reduced sanctions to judgment, ordered Parents to pay an additional $17,282.50 (plus the prior $2,000), and denied Parents’ petition to terminate or modify grandparent visitation.
Parents appealed; this Court affirmed, holding contempt findings and fee sanctions within the trial court’s discretion and that Parents failed to show a changed circumstance warranting termination.

Issue	Parents' Argument	Grandparents' Argument	Held
Whether trial court abused discretion in finding Parents in contempt for refusing visitation	Orders were void/invalid or Parents acted to protect children’s best interests, so refusal was justified	Orders were valid; Parents willfully disobeyed clear visitation orders and previously exhausted remedies were rejected on appeal	No abuse of discretion; contempt upheld — orders were valid and disobedience was willful
Whether $17,282.50 (plus $2,000) fee sanction was improper	Invoice included charges unrelated to visitation; award unreliable and excessive	Fees were incurred enforcing visitation; court may apportion and awarded less than full invoiced amount	No abuse of discretion; trial court reasonably awarded fees as contempt sanctions
Whether denial of Parents’ petition to terminate/modification of visitation was error	Three years without visits and alleged harms show changed circumstances; court should terminate visitation	Parents bore burden to show modification/termination; offered no new evidence and lapse resulted from Parents’ own conduct	No abuse of discretion; Parents failed to prove change in circumstances to warrant termination

McGill v. McGill, 801 N.E.2d 1249 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004) (appellate rule on appellee brief absence and prima facie error)
Orlich v. Orlich, 859 N.E.2d 671 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006) (definition of prima facie error)
In re Visitation of C.L.H., 908 N.E.2d 320 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009) (standard when appellee fails to brief)
Akiwumi v. Akiwumi, 23 N.E.3d 734 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014) (distinction between direct and indirect contempt)
Francies v. Francies, 759 N.E.2d 1106 (Ind. Ct. App. 2001) (willful disobedience as indirect contempt)
Ind. High Sch. Athletic Ass'n v. Martin, 765 N.E.2d 1238 (Ind. 2002) (contempt requires clear, unambiguous order and willful disobedience)
City of Gary v. Major, 822 N.E.2d 165 (Ind. 2005) (relief unavailable for void orders; remedy is appeal for erroneous orders)
Carson v. Ross, 509 N.E.2d 239 (Ind. Ct. App. 1987) (disobedience of erroneous order constitutes contempt)
Witt v. Jay Petroleum, Inc., 964 N.E.2d 198 (Ind. 2012) (trial court discretion to award fees based on presented evidence without strict apportionment)
In re Paternity of K.I., 903 N.E.2d 453 (Ind. 2009) (requirement for findings and conclusions on grandparent visitation)
In re Visitation of M.L.B., 983 N.E.2d 583 (Ind. 2013) (McCune factors and parent’s constitutionally protected decision-making weight)