Indiana Court of Appeals rules paternity can be rescinded
On 08 July 2008 the Indiana Court of Appeals issued an opinion in the Paternity of M.M. in which a man who was defrauded into believing he was the father had paternity testing showing that he was not the father. The district court denied his petition to rescind paternity stating that allowing a man who was defrauded into believing he was the father to rescind paternity and not pay child support would go against public policy.
This is a rather complex case that involves two courts in different states holding hearings on the same date concerning the same child. The maternal grandparents had sought custody of the child in an Indiana court on the same day that the putative father sought to establish parentage in Illinois. The question became which court had jurisdiction over the child and the parties.
This case affirms our position on child support cases in which the mother remarries. Mother sought a support modification after quiting her job, which would have paid $60,000 per year, following her remarriage. Father produced evidence of her past employment and the availability of jobs in her field. The trial court ordered that support remain the same based on her imputed income and that mother is to pay over $4,000 in father's attorney fees.
Dwyer v Winkoop - August 21, 1997 - Published - SHARPNACK, Chief Judge Kimberly Winkoop Dwyer appeals the judgment of the trial court modifying custody of her minor child in favor of the child's father, Troy Wynkoop. The sole issue raised for our review is whether the trial court erroneously modified the existing custody order. We affirm.
Hughes v Rogusta - June 7, 2005 - Published - KIRSCH Gina Hughes (Mother) appeals the trial court’s order granting custody of her minor child, M.S. R. (Child), to the child’s biological father, Timothy Rogusta (Father). Mother raises two issues: I. Whether the trial court should have applied the child custody modification standard set out in IC 31-14-13-6 instead of the initial custody determination standard set out in IC 31-14-13-2. II. Whether some of the trial court’s findings and conclusions are supported by the evidence presented at the hearing. We affirm.
Kenda v Pleskovic - September 21, 2007 - Published - BAILEY Barbara Kenda ("Mother") appeals a custody modification order awarding Boris Pleskovic ("Father") custody of their child, A.P.K. We affirm. Mother raises two issues: I. Whether the trial court had jurisdiction to modify the custody order of a court of another state; II. Whether the trial court abused its discretion in modifying custody, awarding sole legal and primary physical custody of A.P.K. to Father.
Pro Se cases by members of Indiana Custodial Rights Advocates are shown on this page for your review. You are welcome to use any of the attached documents in your own filings. If you need assistance please click here
Here is an example of a successful child support payment modification. This ORDER subsequently reduced payments by $10/wk when mother failed to provide to the court evidence of insurance cost.
Here is an example of a successful child custody modification.
The failure of a government entity to ensure that the rights of employees or citizens are protected. Often used in police actions. In particular circumstances may be applied to school and CPS cases. Read this opinion by FBI adviser Michael Callahan. Contains citations to many useful case law citations.
Illinois Appellate Brief Challenging Constitutionality of Divorce law in all Aspects
This site has links to prominent cases on various issues.
Warrants must meet certain criteria for them to be valid. Here you will find case law detailing the requirements of a valid warrant and your right to ignore an invalid warrant.
Perjury in Relocation Case
Read more about Stuart Showalter's efforts to secure visitation for his son and trying to provide for his well-being.
Complaint for Perjury filed with the Prosecutor - Click here
Appeals Court Upholds Father's Custody of Children
Irma Marie Polemeni (wife), appeals the trial court’s June 27, 2006 final decree awarding Joseph Polemeni (husband) a divorce a vinculo matrimonii. Wife contends the trial court erred (1) by awarding the divorce on the ground of adultery, (2) by denying her request for spousal support, and (3) by awarding husband primary physical custody of the parties’ two minor children. Husband seeks an award of attorney’s fees and costs associated with this appeal. We affirm the judgment of the trial court and award husband his attorney’s fees and costs.
Your right to court appointed counsel in criminal trials if you cannot afford an attorney was granted by the U.S. Supreme Court in Gideon v Wainwright . Case has important footnotes.
ARREST: You have the right to remain silent - USE IT! This was upheld in Miranda v Arizona which allows you to not speak to police or stop questioning in any investigation in which you are or feel you could be a suspect. Never answer questions unless you are being recorded.
Contempt: Rights, responsibility and recourse. Click here for an article that clearly explains contempt of court.
Jones v Huckaby - July 28, 2009 - Not for Publication - BARNES, Chief Judge Mark Jones appeals the judgment of the trial court maintaining the existing equal Shared Parenting custody of the children. The issue raised for our review is whether the trial court erroneously ordered the existing equal Shared Parenting order to remain in place against the parents wishes. The court found that equal Shared Parenting was in the best interest of the children. Affirmed.
Higginbotham v Higginbotham - November 05, 2004 - PUBLISHED - BAKER, Chief Judge Father raises the issue of whether the trial court abused its discretion by: (1) rejecting the parties’ agreement to continue joint legal custody; and (2) terminating Robert’s midweek visitation and conditioning its resumption upon K.H. showing vast improvement in her scholastics. The court found that joint legal custody was not in the best interest of the child after father threatened to disconue giving drugs to the child that are linked to sudden death. Affirmed.
Finnerty v Clutter - November 29, 2009 - PUBLISHED - BARNES, Judge
Mother raises three issues, which we consolidate and restate as whether the trial court abused its discretion by failing to order Father to take the children to church on Sunday during his parenting time or alternatively, by failing to adjust Father’s parenting time so that Mother could take the children to church. Joint Legal Custody defined. Affirmed.
Lawsuit for wrongfully claiming support arrearage
On 01 February 2007 Stuart Showalter filed a tort claim against his ex-wife alleging that she had wrongfully claimed a child support payment arrearage as probable cause for the filing of a charge of Non-Support of a Dependent (I.C. 35-46-1-5{a}). The lawsuit alleges that the Affidavit of Probable Cause contained no material evidence or proposed testimony that would support the charge that the defendant had ever failed to provide "food, clothing, shelter or medical care" to his dependent child. Instead a falsified child support arrearage was given as the cause which does not apply to the criminal charge of failure to provide support. Click here to view the pleadings in the case.
The stunning development was that four days later the charge was dismissed. Obviously the State was too afraid to let this case go to trial and have it proven that this criminal charge does not apply to child support payments as has been shown on this site. Prosecutors still try to intimidate defendants into accepting plea agreements under this charge.
Do not be intimidated, do not let a lawyer represent you, do fight and destroy all those who falsely accuse you. There are examples of pleadings and case law cited on this page and throughout this website.
Cindy Sheehan's Conviction Overturned by D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals
