James Bogner v. Teresa Bogner
29 N.E.3d 733
| Ind. | 2015Background
- Parents divorced in 2007; child H.B. born 2005. Father initially ordered to pay $162/week, later modified to $135/week in 2008.
- In 2013 Father sought another modification due to increased overnights (stipulated 140–145/yr) and reduced childcare costs after moving closer to the child.
- Under the Child Support Guidelines Father’s gross obligation would be $151/week but a parenting-time credit ($92/week) would reduce it to $59/week; parties stipulated incomes and overnights; joint worksheet admitted.
- Mother argued $59/week was unreasonable given her larger share of overnights (220–230/yr), fixed/controlled expenses, and uninsured medical costs; she sought an upward deviation and the yearly tax exemption.
- The trial court, after a summary proceeding agreed to by counsel, awarded Father only half the parenting-time credit (resulting in $105/week), ordered Mother to claim the dependency exemption each year, and required Father to pay 56% of extracurricular expenses.
- The Court of Appeals reversed on both deviation and tax-exemption grounds; the Indiana Supreme Court granted transfer and affirmed the trial court.
Issues
| Issue | Mother’s Argument | Father’s Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether full parenting-time credit must be awarded for stipulated overnights | Credit not mandatory when award would be unjust or would jeopardize custodial parent’s ability to support child; deviation appropriate given Mother’s expenses | Full credit mandatory under Guidelines for the stipulated overnights, reducing support to $59/week | Trial court may deny or reduce credit; it did not clearly err in awarding only half the credit and deviating upward to $105/week |
| Whether trial court could deviate from Guideline amount based on summary proceeding evidence | Summary proceedings were agreed to; informal exhibits and counsel argument suffice to support factual findings for deviation | Evidence was insufficient under formal rules; findings unsupported and deviation improper | Father waived challenge to summary format; trial court’s findings articulated its reasoning and were not clearly erroneous |
| Whether trial court could award dependency exemption to Mother annually | Mother asked for exemption every year; presented exhibit showing benefit; Father had opportunity to respond | Father argued trial court failed to consider required factors and evidence of tax benefit was unsubstantiated | Trial court properly considered issue raised at hearing, Father failed to object and had chance to rebut; award to Mother affirmed |
| Standard of review for support modification | N/A (issues of application) | N/A | Clear-error standard applies to trial court’s findings and deviations from Guidelines |
Key Cases Cited
- Young v. Young, 891 N.E.2d 1045 (Ind. 2008) (Guidelines and parenting-time credit principles)
- Kinsey v. Kinsey, 640 N.E.2d 42 (Ind. 1994) (clear-error standard for deviation review)
- McGinley-Ellis v. Ellis, 638 N.E.2d 1249 (Ind. 1994) (appellate review of findings under Trial Rule 52)
- Quinn v. Threlkel, 858 N.E.2d 665 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006) (trial court may consider and order transfer of dependency exemption when issue is raised at hearing)