Woodward v. Norton
939 N.E.2d 657
| Ind. Ct. App. | 2010Background
- Norton filed petition to dissolve the marriage on May 19, 2004; dissolution decree entered October 11, 2007.
- Woodward petitioned to modify child support on October 2, 2008 and moved for change of judge on October 3, 2008 amid multiple pending matters.
- On October 21, 2008 the trial court transferred venue to Special Judge Gotsch; post-transfer bifurcation allocated pre-transfer matters to the trial court and post-transfer matters and Woodward’s modification to Gotsch.
- Gotsch temporarily reduced Woodward's child support from $798 to $300 per week on January 13, 2009; later proceedings addressed arrears and related obligations.
- Norton filed post-judgment rules to show cause; Gotsch found Woodward in contempt on November 17, 2009; Woodward argued lack of acceptance of jurisdiction; trial court later deemed acceptance not filed but waived.
- Trial court’s April 1, 2010 order held Woodward waived jurisdiction issue, noted acceptance should have been filed, and affirmed that all further proceedings occur under Gotsch; Woodward appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did Gotsch properly assume jurisdiction without a signed acceptance? | Woodward contends no valid acceptance. | Norton argues waiver due to non objection and conduct. | Waived; no relief for lack of acceptance. |
| Did the trial court retain proper jurisdiction over pending matters post-transfer? | Trial court retained jurisdiction over pending motions. | Woodward claimed improper retention of jurisdiction. | Proper; change of judge is prospective; pending motions remain with trial court. |
| Was Woodward properly found in contempt for non-payment of obligations? | Woodward willfully disobeyed court orders and had ability to pay. | Woodward claimed lack of ability to pay. | Contempt sustained; Woodward had ability to pay and willfully failed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Catt v. State, 749 N.E.2d 633 (Ind.Ct.App.2001) (waiver when no objection to irregularity in special-judge appointment)
- Bivins v. State, 485 N.E.2d 89 (Ind.1985) (appointment irregularities and waiver doctrine)
- Thomas v. State, 656 N.E.2d 819 (Ind.Ct.App.1995) (objections to special judge presence must be timely)
- In re Marriage of Turner, 785 N.E.2d 259 (Ind.Ct.App.2003) (Trial Rule 76; change of judge prospective)
- Mosser v. Mosser, 729 N.E.2d 197 (Ind.Ct.App.2000) (appellate review of contempt determinations)
- Piercey v. Piercey, 727 N.E.2d 26 (Ind.Ct.App.2000) (willful disobedience required for contempt for court orders)
- Marks v. Tolliver, 839 N.E.2d 703 (Ind.Ct.App.2005) (ability to pay required for contempt in child-support cases)