Winslow v. Fifer
2012 Ind. App. LEXIS 318
Ind. Ct. App.2012Background
- Parents Julie Winslow and Larry Fifer have two academically gifted daughters, J.F. (ISU) and A.F. (Purdue).
- March 2009 trial court order required Mother to pay one-third and Father two-thirds of J.F.'s post-secondary expenses; Mother to reimburse 37.19% of that share.
- August 2010 mediated modification kept J.F. emancipated for weekly child support but preserved obligation to pay education expenses; A.F. to receive only minimal support.
- Fall 2010 and Spring 2011 costs for J.F. at ISU totaled $1,455.48; Father requested reimbursement from Mother, who did not respond.
- May 2011 Father petitioned for contempt and sought $750 in attorney fees; trial court found Mother in contempt and ordered identical proportional share for A.F.
- Trial court concluded A.F. would attend Purdue with relatively low costs due to substantial scholarships; ordered Mother to subsidize a portion of A.F.'s 2011 fall tuition.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether proportionate share of education expenses was correctly computed | Winslow contends miscalculation by omitting tax credits and boundless A.F. scope. | Fifer asserts proper calculation under statute and caselaw; tax credits were not evidenced and were de minimis. | Affirmed; trial court properly computed proportionate share. |
| Whether the contempt finding was proper | Winslow argues lack of knowledge of J.F.'s living situation justified nonpayment. | Fifer asserts willful disobedience to a valid order; contempt appropriate to coerce compliance. | Affirmed; court did not abuse discretion in contempt finding. |
| Whether awarding $750 attorney fees as contempt remedy was proper | Winslow challenges overall fee award as excessive and not properly tied to contempt. | Fifer contends inherent authority to award fees in civil contempt; amount properly proportioned to contempt proceedings. | Affirmed; trial court did not abuse discretion in fee award. |
Key Cases Cited
- Warner v. Warner, 725 N.E.2d 975 (Ind.App. 2000) (apportionment reviewed for reasonableness, not credibility)
- Dowdell v. State, 720 N.E.2d 1146 (Ind. 1999) (offer of proof required to preserve error)
- Benton Cnty. Remonstrators v. Bd. of Zoning Appeals of Benton Cnty., 905 N.E.2d 1090 (Ind.App. 2009) (waiver principle for appellate review)
- Crowl v. Berryhill, 678 N.E.2d 828 (Ind.App. 1997) (inherent authority to award attorney fees in civil contempt)
- Mosser v. Mosser, 729 N.E.2d 197 (Ind.App. 2000) (remedies in civil contempt must be coercive or remedial)
- City of Gary v. Major, 822 N.E.2d 165 (Ind.App. 2005) (contempt requires notice and willful disobedience when coercive remedy sought)
- Jones v. State, 847 N.E.2d 190 (Ind.App. 2006) (contempt determination within trial court’s discretion)