Kurt R. Duncan v. Betsy J. Duncan (mem. dec.), 81 N.E.3d 219

Marriage dissolved in 2009; two children Brittany (1993) and Nattalee (1995).
2012 order obligated Father to pay part of Brittany’s college expenses, contingent on GPA.
2014 order extended college-expense consideration to Nattalee, again tied to GPA; Father found in indirect contempt for Brittany-related arrearage.
Court ordered arrearage payments and ongoing college contributions, and awarded attorney’s fees to Mother.
Father argued repudiation by children, lack of current GPA-based obligation, contempt, and attorney’s fees; appellate court vacates/remands on GPA issues and contempt.
Court remanded for evidentiary determination of whether GPA requirements are satisfied and potential recalculation of obligations.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Did the children repudiate the Father?	Father: repudiation exists;	Mother: no repudiation; children attempted relationship.	Children did not repudiate Father.
Is Father currently obligated to pay post-secondary expenses given GPA requirements?	Father: GPA not proven;	Mother: GPA met/maintained to trigger obligation.	Court erred in finding current obligation; remanded for GPA proof.
Are the college-expense orders duplicative of child support?	Duplicative payments should be avoided.	Orders align with postsecondary costs; not duplicative.	No duplicative obligation found; remand for GPA-specific calculation.
Did the trial court properly consider Father's ability to pay?	Court should consider Father’s ability and expenses.	Evidence insufficient to show error; court could infer ability to pay.	No clear error; court acted within discretion.
Was Father properly held in contempt for nonpayment of college expenses?	Contempt finding supported by failure to pay.	No current obligation to pay; contempt not sustainable.	Contempt reversed; vacate contempt and related fees.

Lovold v. Ellis, 988 N.E.2d 1144 (Ind. Ct. App. 2013) (repudiation defined; complete refusal to participate may defeat education support)
Norris v. Pethe, 833 N.E.2d 1024 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005) (repudiation concept cited in context of education support)
McKay v. McKay, 644 N.E.2d 164 (Ind. Ct. App. 1994) (parental duty to educate not absolute; repudiation possible)
Bales v. Bales, 801 N.E.2d 196 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004) (repudiation as defense to college expenses; appellate standard of review)
Carr v. Carr, 600 N.E.2d 943 (Ind. 1992) (scaling of educational expenses; duplicative support concern)
Winslow v. Fifer, 969 N.E.2d 1087 (Ind. Ct. App. 2012) (clearly erroneous standard for apportionment of college expenses)
In re Paternity of Pickett, 44 N.E.3d 756 (Ind. Ct. App. 2015) (standard for reviewing evidence on parental obligations)