Todd A. Bylsma v. Diana (Bylsma) Smith (mem. dec.)
74A01-1611-DR-2525
| Ind. Ct. App. | May 2, 2017Background
- Todd Bylsma (Father) and Diana Smith (Mother) divorced in 2007; their daughter Robyn was born in 1996. Parents shared joint custody; Father paid $500/month child support.
- Robyn’s relationship with Father deteriorated during her teens; she graduated high school 2014 and began attending Purdue University.
- Mother petitioned (July 2014) for Father to contribute to Robyn’s postsecondary educational expenses; Father counterfiled for contempt (Sept. 2014) and later sought modification.
- After an evidentiary hearing (June 29, 2016), the trial court ordered Father to pay a portion of Robyn’s undergraduate expenses and denied his contempt motion; Father appealed.
- The trial court found Robyn had not "repudiated" Father because she repeatedly attempted written contact and invitations and the record showed Father bore significant responsibility for the strained relationship.
- The court treated Father’s reduced 2015 income from a startup as voluntary underemployment and averaged prior years’ income plus projected 2016 earnings to calculate his ability to pay; it also found Mother did not willfully violate the decree by failing to provide school/activity information.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Father) | Defendant's Argument (Mother) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether adult child repudiated parent, relieving parent of college contribution | Robyn repudiated Father (complete refusal to participate) so Father should not be required to pay postsecondary support | Robyn did not completely refuse contact; she sent repeated invitations and communications | Trial court: No repudiation; Robyn left open possibility of rebuilding relationship; Father remains responsible for part of college costs |
| Proper calculation of Father’s income for apportioning college expenses | Court miscalculated income and should not impute pre-startup earnings or projected sale proceeds | Court may treat Father as voluntarily underemployed and use prior years’ earnings plus projected income to determine ability to pay | Trial court: Calculation not erroneous; discretion to determine potential income and apportion expenses considering parents’ incomes |
| Whether order could obligate Father beyond bachelor’s degree | Father feared obligation could extend past undergraduate degree | Mother sought contribution to undergraduate-related expenses only | Trial court: Order limited to undergraduate/bachelor’s degree expenses; no error found |
| Whether Mother was in contempt for failing to share school/activity information | Mother willfully withheld educational/extracurricular information, violating joint custody decree | Mother provided contact info to school; Father made no effort to request or obtain records; decree not specific on obligations | Trial court: Denied contempt — Mother did not willfully violate decree; Father failed to pursue remedies earlier |
Key Cases Cited
- Koontz v. Scott, 60 N.E.3d 1080 (Ind. Ct. App. 2016) (explaining repudiation requires a complete refusal by an adult child to participate in a relationship)
- Schacht v. Schacht, 892 N.E.2d 1271 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008) (postsecondary educational expenses are in the nature of child support)
- Young v. Young, 891 N.E.2d 1045 (Ind. 2008) (trial court child support calculations receive strong deference)
- Allen v. Allen, 54 N.E.3d 344 (Ind. 2016) (postsecondary education does not include graduate school beyond a bachelor’s degree)
- Warner v. Warner, 725 N.E.2d 975 (Ind. Ct. App. 2000) (trial court discretion to award and set amount of postsecondary educational expenses)
- In re Adoption of N.W.R., 971 N.E.2d 110 (Ind. Ct. App. 2012) (appellate court will not develop appellee’s arguments and applies a relaxed standard when appellee does not brief)