Lynette (Pierce) Loud v. Yair Martinez-Ruiz (mem. dec.), 49A02-1611-DR-2683

Parents married in 2011, separated Jan 2015; two children (born 2010 and 2013). Mother had primary physical and legal custody at time of final hearing.
Mother filed for dissolution (Mar 2015) and filed notice of intent to relocate to Fort Hood, Texas (Apr 2016) to live with and marry an Army boyfriend; Father objected and moved to modify custody.
Final hearings on dissolution, relocation, and custody occurred Apr 19 and May 31, 2016. Mother planned to quit a long-term job and rely partly on an Amway business if she moved.
Trial court issued a dissolution decree (Aug 29, 2016) signed by the magistrate but not by a judge; Mother did not raise that lack of judge signature in a motion to correct error.
Trial court denied Mother’s relocation request, retained primary custody with Mother (but provided that relocation would transfer custody to Father), set parenting time and child support ($54/week), and allocated childcare and uninsured medical expense responsibilities.
On appeal Mother challenged (1) the magistrate’s authority to sign the dissolution decree, (2) denial of relocation, and (3) the child-support calculation based on childcare costs.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Authority of magistrate to enter dissolution decree	Loud: decree invalid because not signed/approved by a trial judge	Martinez-Ruiz: (no appellee brief) implied waiver since no objection below	Waived — Loud failed to preserve objection in trial court; magistrate signature deficiency was not raised in motion to correct error.
Validity of denial of relocation to Texas	Loud: move was in good faith and for legitimate reason (to marry Army partner) and should be allowed	Martinez-Ruiz: move would impose hardship on his parenting time, uncertainties about Mother’s stability and resources, potential to thwart visitation	Affirmed — trial court did not abuse discretion; evidence supported findings on travel hardship, stability concerns, and past interference with visitation.
Child-care expense used in child-support calculation	Loud: trial court used incorrect babysitter rate ($30/shift) though evidence showed $40/shift	Martinez-Ruiz: (no brief) court relied on evidence as presented	Reversed in part — child-support order remanded for recalculation because finding on childcare costs was unsupported by record.
Overall disposition (affirm/reverse/remand)	Loud sought relief on all fronts	Martinez-Ruiz did not respond on appeal	Court: affirm in part (relocation, waiver of magistrate-signature challenge), reverse in part (child support), remand for recalculation and for judge approval if necessary.

Johnson Cty. Rural Elec. Membership Corp. v. Burnell, 484 N.E.2d 989 (Ind. Ct. App. 1985) (appellee’s failure to brief reduces appellee’s burden on appeal to showing prima facie error by appellant)
Floyd v. State, 650 N.E.2d 28 (Ind. 1994) (failure to object at trial to officer’s authority waives the issue on appeal)
In re Adoption I.B., 32 N.E.3d 1164 (Ind. 2015) (magistrates may not enter final appealable orders except in limited circumstances; court must approve final order)
Baxendale v. Raich, 878 N.E.2d 1252 (Ind. 2008) (appellate deference to trial court’s child custody findings and factual determinations)
In re Paternity of J.J., 911 N.E.2d 725 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009) (relocation may justify custody change; trial court must consider statutory relocation factors)
Kirk v. Kirk, 770 N.E.2d 304 (Ind. 2002) (reversal requires evidence that positively demands appellant’s proposed conclusion)
Bogner v. Bogner, 29 N.E.3d 733 (Ind. 2015) (child-support calculations are presumptively valid and reviewed for abuse of discretion)