by

The state’s court of appeals recently issued a ruling on an Indiana child custody and support case.As our Highland divorce attorneys understand it, the case of Miller v. Carpenter involved a couple with two children – an 8-year-old son and a 10-year-old daughter – whose divorce was finalized in 2008.

According to court records, the two reached a child custody settlement in which the mother would have sole legal custody and primary physical custody of the kids. The father would then get them every other weekend and then one overnight visit mid-week. For special occasions and holidays, the pair agreed to work it out according to the Indiana Parenting Time Guidelines, which lay out a very specific schedule for everything from Mother’s and Father’s Day to Christmas to the child’s birthdays.

Further, the parents agreed that the father would receive child support credits for 98 days, rather than the approximately 130 days he actually had them (meaning he was technically paying more than he had to).

Then in mid-June, the mother filed a notice that she planned to move. While the father didn’t oppose this relocation, he did request that the custody arrangement be modified. He wanted joint custody that would allow him to spend Sunday evenings with his kids, as well as the ability to pay less in child support. This would be based not only on the increased time he was spending with the children, but also on the fact that the mother had remarried, and therefore her financial situation had changed from the time of the first order.

The father argued that he felt out of the loop in parental decisions. The mother argued that the child support shouldn’t be lowered because the father worked full time, yet wasn’t even paying rent to his parents, with whom he lived.

Ultimately, the trial court ruled in the father’s favor. Citing Indiana Code Section 31-17-2-15, it ruled that because the parents could communicate without being hostile, it would be in the best interests of the children to award joint legal custody, as well as overnight stays on Sundays, and additionally reduced his support payments from about $250 a week to $150 a week, based on the increased amount of time he was spending with the children and the fact that the mother’s pay had increased and the cost of child care had gone down.

The mother appealed this decision, arguing that the lower court had abused its discretion by modifying the legal custody order, which as a result changed the physical custody order, and challenging whether the court abused its discretion by reducing the father’s support payments. The mother said the fact that she had moved wasn’t reason enough to make any of the modifications that were made.

The appellate judges in turn decided that the lower court did in fact err on the issue of joint custody because not enough had changed to warrant a full modification. They did, however, maintain the lower court’s ruling on the amount of time the father could spend with his children because more time with him was in their best interest. Further, they said the modifications to the child support payments were warranted because:

1. The father had been initially paying about 20 percent more than he was obligated to in the first place;
2. More than a year had gone by since the original order.

While this case doesn’t establish anything extraordinarily groundbreaking, what it illustrates is that Indiana child custody and Indiana child support issues are constantly evolving. People get hired and laid off and promoted. People move. People remarry. People change. And any of these circumstances can warrant another look at the original order.
Continue reading

by

In society right now there is an ongoing discussion about “Main Street v. Wall Street.” So many innocent individuals are losing their rights because of the power of big business.

If you have been injured because of defective products in Highland, having your voice be heard is important not only to your family, but others like you.Our experienced Highland injury attorneys understand what it takes to fight big business to get you the award you deserve.

Gulf Underwriters Ins. Co. v. Burris is a Minnesota case between an injured plaintiff and an insurance company over injuries sustained due to a defective product. Burris (“plaintiff”) fell off a ladder manufactured by Versa and sustained serious injuries. Versa had a commercial general liability insurance policy and a “Self Insured Retention” (“SIR”) endorsement with Gulf Underwriters Insurance Company (“Gulf”). Because of this policy, Burris sued Gulf for the policy limits they had in coverage for Versa.

The problem in this case arose when Gulf filed a motion for summary judgment claiming that because Versa had not complied with their obligations under the SIR potion of the policy, the plaintiff was not entitled to any benefit as a third party.

Upon examining the evidence the court did find that Versa dissolved after expiration of the policy. However, the question was whether this was a material breach of the contract for coverage under this policy. Furthermore, the court was charged with analyzing how the effects of a material breach on the insurance coverage available to third parties.

Insurance policies are often extremely confusing and full of vague terms. And Gulf’s policy was not any different in this case. The court actually printed this policy in the decision to show the way key terms were used interchangeably to contradict each other. Also, the court noted that portions of this policy that were inconsistent with Gulf’s contentions were left out of their previous court briefs and memorandums.

In the policy involved in this case, there was a provision that stated that regardless of compliance with obligations of the SIR, all of the provisions of the general insurance policy apply. Therefore, the court found that the amount of the coverage could be affected by non-compliance with SIR, but not the fact that coverage was available would remain a constant.

A central concept in most cases is contract law. Establishing the type of contract at question is critical in determining what law applies. A contract consists of an offer and acceptance. In order to have acceptance, there needs to be a meeting of the minds. A contract is considered executory where a contract is created but not executed because further performance by one or both of the parties is still required. Gulf argued that because Versa was not up to date with payments, this policy was an executory contract and Gulf was released from coverage obligations in accidents associated with Versa’s defective products. The court here classified this as a “futile attempt” to avoid liability, and cited case law which is followed by “every court” in the county.

In Vandeveer, the court held that , “insurance policies for which the policy periods have expired and the premium has been paid are not executory contracts.” In re Vanderveer Estates Holding, LLC, 328 B.R. 18, 26 (Bankr. E.D.N.Y 2005).

For the reasons stated above, this court found that this policy was not an executory contract and Gulf did not provide the court with any evidence that the contract was breached by Versa. Therefore, the defendant motion for summary judgment was dismissed and the case was remanded to the lower court.

It is very important to understand that all attorneys are responsible for the work they submit to the court. There is an obligation for attorneys to present relevant state and federal statute as well as case law that supports and contradicts their contentions. In this case the court found that the attorney was withholding information that could be detrimental to their case and they found that an award of attorney fees for the plaintiff’s attorney was a proper punishment.
Continue reading

by

Car accidents in Highland and elsewhere are the top killers for teenagers in the United States. This young driving age group possesses much less experience behind the wheel than you and I. Not only do they have less experience, they’re also more likely to engage in distractions while driving, distractions that can produce both serious and fatal accidents.

According to a recent study from the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety, female teenage drivers are the worst of the bunch. They’re more likely to engage in distractions including cell phones and text messaging devices, than males of their same age, according to US News.Researchers at AAA looked through roughly 8,000 video clips from the inside of teens’ cars in North Carolina. It was concluded that cell phones and smartphones were the number one kind of distraction for these young drivers, especially the teen girls.

Our Gary car accident lawyers understand that teens need coaching through their driving career. This doesn’t mean that parents can rely on the state graduated driver’s licensing (GDL) program. Parents need to stay involved in their teen’s driving habits to make sure that they’re staying safe behind the wheel. Enforce your own rules to help keep them safe on our roadways.

The study concluded that females were engaging in electronic distractions behind the wheel about 7 percent of the time. Male teens were only engaging in these distractions just 4 percent of the time. While we’re proud of the boys for keeping their phones down a little bit more, the truth of the matter is that any use of these devices greatly increases accident risks. While this study focused on electronic distractions, other kind of distractions were witnessed in 15 percent of the clips, including eating, drinking, grooming and adjusting various controls.

Believe it not, older teens were more likely to engage in these distractions, too. It seems like the more comfortable they got behind the wheel the more likely they were to whip out their cell phones.

Researchers concluded that females were twice as likely to use an electronic device while driving, 10 percent more likely to engage in other distractions, 50 percent more likely to reach for objects and 25 percent more likely to drink and eat at the wheel. The only thing boys were more likely to do was to turn around in their seats and to talk to people who were outside of the car.

It was also noted that teens were more likely to talk loudly and horseplay with one another when there was more than one passenger present in the vehicle.

Teenage drivers who use electronics at the wheel take their eyes of the road about a second longer than those who were distracted in other ways. It may not seem like a lot, but it could mean the difference between life and death.

“That extra second can mean the difference between managed risk and tragedy for any driver,” said Peter Kissinger, President and CEO of AAA.
Continue reading

by

A man embroiled in a Shelbyville, Indiana divorce had hit the jackpot – literally – or so it seemed at first.Our Highalnd divorce lawyers understand that as it turned out, the winner was actually an older woman in her 70s. But the case brings up a number of good points for those going through a divorce – even if you aren’t lucky enough to win the lottery.

According to the Indy Star, the situation at first seemed almost like a made for television drama. At stake was a $35 million state lottery jackpot.

The estranged wife of the Hoosier Lotto jackpot took to the local airwaves recently, saying she wanted to make sure she got a share of the winnings. She even met with an Indiana divorce attorney, who filed a motion to stop the husband from spending any money at all until all financial matters can be resolved.

Apparently, the relationship between the two had been strained for some time. They had married in 2008, but were planning a divorce. However, the two still lived together, dated on and off and have two children together. The husband, however, had been reticent to actually follow through with filing a divorce.

Speaking to a local television station recently, the wife told a reporter that her husband called her up out of the blue and asked if the divorce could be made final. Because the sudden turn of events didn’t seem to make sense to the wife, she asked if he had won the lottery or something. She said he avoided the question at first, but then later conceded, he had, in fact, won. She says he tried to conceal those winnings from her and quietly get a divorce so that she wouldn’t be entitled to any of it.

The truth of the matter, however, is that he was not the winner – although several local television news stations had aired information indicating that he was. Apparently, several reporters forgot to check their facts.

However, the wife is still not 100 percent convinced. Her lawyer has filed a temporary restraining order on the husband’s expenditures as a matter of precaution.

“If he doesn’t have any winnings, obviously it doesn’t have any effect,” the wife’s lawyer was quoted as saying.

At issue here is whether the wife would be entitled to those earnings, even if the two were separated. Under Indiana Code Title 31, the wife would have been entitled to half of those winnings, as they would have been obtained during the course of the marriage – regardless of whether the two were personally estranged.

Generally, division of property and assets in an Indiana divorce is going to be split down the middle, 50-50. There are a few situations in which that could be argued that such a division could be disputed:

  • If the property or income was acquired prior to the marriage or through an inheritance or gift;
  • If one spouse contributed significantly more to the acquisition than another;
  • If there are children involved and one spouse is seeking to stay in the marital house with the children;

In reality, however, property valuations and other considerations give your attorney much room with which to work. And failure to protect yourself could result in an inequitable property settlement.

Additionally, attempting to hide any of these assets can result in legal repercussions. One way to avoid this is to have a prenuptial agreement prior to marriage, so that these type of issues are sorted out before there is any animosity between the two parties.

What this case also proves is that dragging your feet on a divorce is not always in your best financial interests.

If you are contemplating a divorce, make an appointment with an experienced Highland family law attorney to discuss your options.
Continue reading

by

Many people may equate a contested divorce in Indiana, with bitter arguments swirling around issues of child custody, alimony, property division and so forth.A new trend, however, is being observed by child custody attorneys in Indiana and across the country: pet custody.

There are a number of theories behind this. Many people are having children much later in life than earlier generations. While these couples are waiting for the perfect time to enter into the lifelong commitment that is parenthood, they are less choosy about buying a pet together. These animals become members of the family, with both parties deeply invested. When the couple splits, the custody fight can be nearly as contentious as if it were a child.

Another reason for the growth of this type of disagreement stems from the increase in same-sex marriages. While Indiana does not allow this type of union, among states that do, this is an issue that is skyrocketing in prevalence.

The Associated Press reports that in a recent survey from the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers (AAML), more than a fourth said that cases involving pet custody have increased a great deal since 2001.

Often if there is a child involved, a judge will place the pet in the primary home of the child.

The question more frequently being raised, however, is: What if the animal is the child?

In all 50 states, animals are considered property. That means that judges and mediators have been working to divide them up just as they would the furniture or the beach house.

However, it seems that is changing. Ken Altshuler, president of the AAML, said judges are beginning to change the way they see the issue. They are starting to recognize the strong emotional attachments that people have to their pets, and therefore, it’s being given a greater consideration under the law.

It may have been years ago that people were somewhat ashamed to battle for custody of a pet. Society may have viewed the animal as not much more than a life accessory. That’s not the case anymore.

There have even been cases in which people split custody of the animals, with visitation schedules and all – much like they would in any Indiana child custody case. Usually, though, that is something that has to be worked out by the parties themselves.

Steven May, a pet consultant, even wrote a book about the issue, which he and his ex-wife wrestled with following their divorce more than five years ago after more than 15 years of marriage. They have since worked out an arrangement in which they share custody not only of their daughter, but of their pets.

It may seem strange to some, but any pet lover will tell you that a divorce is even more traumatic when you are facing the prospect of losing every aspect of the life you had – including your beloved pets. An Indiana divorce attorney can help you explore all your options, and figure out the best – and hopefully most amicable – solution for you.
Continue reading

by

Tactical decisions in an Highland personal injury case are usually the responsibility of your attorney after consultation with you the client. Knowing all the rules is impossible when you are concentrating on recovering from your injuries. Our experienced and knowledgeable Indiana attorneys can help give you the peace of mind you deserve.In Rhonda v. Weathers there was a car accident which resulted in litigation. The plaintiff sued the defendant claiming that the defendant had been negligent in his operation of his motor vehicle.

When there is a lawsuit for negligence in a personal injury case, the plaintiff is responsible for proving by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant breached their duty of care. The plaintiff has the burden of providing this to the court with evidence and with arguments surrounding every specific legal element of the negligence claim.

When cases begin, there is a period called discovery. During this period, parties have the opportunity to depose witnesses, file Requests for Production of crucial evidence, Requests for Admissions, and some parties may even decide to settle after receiving all the information on their case.

Although most personal injury cases do settle many do continue on to trial. Understanding the costs and benefits of both settling and trial is a crucial part of the legal process.

It was during this discovery period that the conflict in Rhonda v. Weather became complicated. Rhonda’s attorney received medical bills from the plaintiff and sent a Request for Admissions to the defendant. A request for admissions is a series of questions that one party asks another in order to establish which facts will be disputed in the trial.

Rhonda’s attorney sent the defendant copies of Rhonda’s medical bills and asked the defendant to authenticate that the bills were in fact medical bills for the plaintiff’s injuries sustained because of the car accident between the two parties. Upon receipt of this Request for Admissions, Weathers responded that he was unable to verify that the documents were of the character alleged, as he had no way of authenticating them himself.

At the time that the plaintiff’s attorney moved to enter the records into evidence, the defendant’s attorney never objected. This led the plaintiff’s counsel to argue that the defendant strategically did not answer the questions in the Request for Admissions because he wanted to prolong the time leading up to trial, and create more expenses for the plaintiff.

The plaintiff cited the Mississippi statute that addresses this situation and says a moving party may request the non-moving party pay reasonable legal expenses where the party fails to agree with the truthfulness of a document but later accents to it.

The jury in the trial court that heard this case found that the plaintiff did not meet her burden of proof and granted a verdict for the defendant. This court also rejected the request for sanctions to be imposed on the defendant. Rhonda disagreed with this holding, and appealed to the Supreme Court of Mississippi. The defendant promptly filed a writ of certiorari asking the state Supreme Court to instruct the lower court to look over the facts of only the sanctions involved in this case again.

The main issue was whether the defendant can be charged with sanctions for failing to respond to the Request for Admissions regarding medical records where there was no objection to the entry of those records during trial.

This question is contingent on the state evidence code and the classification of business records and medical records. The court here found that in order for a medical record to be admissible in court without the testimony of a custodian or qualified witness, the document must be self- authenticating. In order for the document to be self-authenticating the record must be accompanied with a “written declaration under oath.”

Because the medical records were not self- authenticating, the defendant had no way to verify their validity; therefore, he cannot be subject to sanctions for a failure on the part of plaintiff’s attorney.

This case shows how important it is to have a skilled attorney fighting for you to help you get the results to which you are entitled, regardless of the complexity of law.
Continue reading

by

In an interesting case that highlights a frequent issue in an Indiana divorce, the supreme court in South Carolina has ruled that divorced parents may have to pay for their children’s college.Indiana child custody attorneys understand that going through a divorce is trying, and often made even more difficult when one parent attempts to shirk responsibility for their children by putting the other parent in the position of having to cover major expenses – from dental work to education. This is where having an experienced attorney can be a tremendous advantage. Sorting through all of these details long before a child reaches college age will put everyone on the same page and save you from future headaches, heartaches – and a precariously low bank balance.

The Associated Press reports the South Carolina Supreme Court has decided that divorced parents who pay child support could also be made to pay for their children to obtain a higher education. Justice voted 3-2 in favor of the decision. The justices decided that because education is so vital to a child’s success, the state holds an interest in ensuring the child is not at a disadvantage.

This case had been entangled in the system for the last five years.

According to media reports, the plaintiff is a single mother who runs a day care, making about $40,000 annually. Her ex-husband, whom she divorced in 1993, had made about $30,000 when they separated. But his income soon shot up to about $250,000 annually. Still, the father’s child support payments for his two children stayed less than $200 weekly.

When the couple’s oldest son expressed a desire to go to college, the father said he would repay his son’s student loans and help with other expenses. The father also said he decided he would halve his child support payments.

But the mother said her ex didn’t hold up his end of the agreement. So she sued him. Originally, the court decided in his favor, saying that parents can’t be forced to pay for higher education. That court also officially reduced the amount of child support he would be made to pay and wouldn’t make him pay for his ex-wife’s attorney.

Then the state Supreme Court changed all that. It reversed the original ruling – and all related prior rulings.

One justice was quoted as saying that although the decision of whether to send a child to college is a personal one, it is not one that should be denied to a child just because his or her parents are divorced. While the court did say that not every parent who pays child support should have to also cover college expenses, some justices were annoyed that the father in this case gave no real explanation as to why he was suddenly going back on his word and refusing to pay. Another justice said that when marriages go sour, a divorce could cloud a parent’s filial or maternal sense of obligation. Children shouldn’t suffer for that, she said.

In this case, the son eventually did graduate from college without his father’s help, and is now a fingerprint analyst for the FBI. His mother was quoted as saying that it’s important for judges to at least take into consideration whether a parent is able to pay.

This victory, while only valid in South Carolina, could foreshadow the push for a similar case to be brought forth in Indiana.
Continue reading

by

When you are in a car accident, you are usually left shaken both physically and mentally. You can even sustain permanent injuries that require extensive medical treatment and maybe even surgery. This is a very serious matter that requires the right a Highland injury attorney to get you the award you deserve.If you are involved in a Highland car accident, Padove Law has the experience in personal injury to guide you through the entire process of a lawsuit.

The case Roache v. Charney highlights some important aspects of a personal injury case. This case was decided by the Delaware Supreme Court and arose because of a car accident. This victim suffered injuries to her neck and back when she was twice rear ended by the defendant. This accident led to months of physical therapy for the victim as well as disc replacement surgery. The doctors treating the victim even found that these injuries would be permanent.

I am drawing your attention to this case because it is very typical of the results of car accidents that happen every day. These accidents can lead to injuries that if left untreated, can lead to pain and suffering for years to come. This is why choosing the right attorney to fight for your rights is such an important decision.

Injuries related to car accidents are very common, but so often people do not take the initiative to get help.

Roache is significant to Indiana personal injury claims because it illustrates some of the common laws surrounding car accidents that you need to know. Although the specific laws vary depending on the state, the central principles cross state lines. The Court in Roach clearly says that when a plaintiff is involved in a personal injury lawsuit, they have to prove that their injuries are the result of the defendant’s negligence. Essentially, the plaintiff has to show that it is more likely than not that their injuries were sustained because the defendant breached their duty of care and drove negligently.

Causation is one of the most crucial parts of most lawsuits. This is the proof of the connection between the defendant’s negligent actions and the plaintiff’s injuries. The court in Roache found that if a plaintiff is alleging that their injuries were sustained because of the defendant, they must provide a medical expert to testify directly. The court goes on to affirm that the plaintiff’s expert must be competent in medically proving a link between the defendant’s negligent actions and the plaintiff’s injuries.

Roache had a difficult time proving this link between the defendant’s negligence and the plaintiff’s injuries, leading to significant confusion. Our attorney’s know what it takes to prove causation as we have been doing it for many years. We can help you navigate through the medical terminology and explain what these personal injury medical reports actually say and how they can affect your case.

Your litigation experience and your award are dependent on the attorney you hire.We will take your case very seriously and assist you in getting the justice you deserve.
Continue reading

by

Parents of young children should take note of recent media reports signaling the threat of possible child injury in Indiana when using the Bumbo seat.The seat, made of soft foam and manufactured in South Africa, has become monstrously popular, selling more than 4 million seats in the U.S. alone.

Many parents seem to love the seats because they allow their young infant to sit up, often for the first time. There are no safety straps or buckles, and manufacturers say this is a good thing, as it’s not meant to restrict the baby’s movement.

But, as our Indiana child injury attorneys know, babies need to be secured. A number of advocacy groups say the fact that that children are not strapped down while in these seats has led to skull fractures and other injuries.

It’s been five years since the seat was initially recalled. In 2007, a number of parents began reporting that their children were being hurt when they were placed in the seat that was then placed on an elevated surface, such as a bathroom counter top or kitchen table.
When the seats were recalled, warning labels were placed on the sides, alerting parents and caregivers to the potential dangers of using the seat up high.

Before the recall, the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission reported it had received reports of 46 accidents. In 14 of those cases, the infants suffered a serious skull fracture. Unfortunately, it does not appear the accidents are being reduced after the recall. In fact, the commission reported that since the recall, it has received reports of 45 more children being hurt after falling out of the seats, with 17 of those suffering head injuries.

Additionally, the commission reports that it has received 50 reports of little babies who fell out of the Bumbo seats when they were on the ground. Of those, two had head injuries and another had a concussion.

One would think this would be enough for the commission to issue a second recall of the product. This is exactly what a number of children’s advocacy groups have been asking for, with a letter-writing campaign to the government agency. They are still waiting to hear back, according to various media outlets.

Even amid concern among parents, caregivers and government regulators, the maker of the Bumbo seat continues to say the product is not a danger. If used correctly, a spokesman said, the seats are safe.

Putting a strap or safety restraint on the seat isn’t an option, the spokesman said, because that would create a false sense of security for parents. The spokesman added that of the 45 new accidents, more than a quarter of them happened in the old seats with no warning labels.

A California pediatrician was quoted by one news agency as saying that even if a parent were standing or sitting right next to the child, an accident in one of these seats could unfold in a split second.
Continue reading

by

Social media has become one of the biggest movements in our world in the last decade. People are able to connect worldwide over social networking web sites. Text messaging has been used as one of the easiest and quickest ways to spread a message.

All of these tools have become important in many people’s lives. They use them all the time to communicate and for some, they have become second nature. But while Indiana divorce attorneys understand their value in society, they also recognize the danger they could pose in an Indiana divorce.A recent story by Reuters suggests that text message evidence could be used against a spouse in a divorce case, which is just another way that the court system is adapting to the new use of technology.

As smartphone technology continues to develop, allowing for instant messaging and fast-moving texting, attorneys say they are seeing an increase in the number of cases where iPhones and other smartphones are cited in evidence of a divorce case. This is according to an association of divorce lawyers.

This follows a previous study from a few years ago, when the group of lawyers noted that there had been an increase in Facebook references in divorce cases as well. As social media and text messaging have become more and more prevalent, it makes sense that lawyers have attempted to use this as evidence to get an edge in court.

While e-mails usually allow a user to re-think what may look like a rant in hindsight, a text message is more immediate. People may be more likely to send exactly what they’re thinking or doing via text, whereas an e-mail provides the opportunity to clarify one’s thoughts.

Text messaging is the most popular form of evidence that comes from smartphones, following by emails, phone numbers, call histories, GPS and Internet search histories. Not every text message can be printed as easily as an e-mail, but there are ways to do it. Some divorce attorneys think that’s why people may be more willing to send a nasty text.

But if a person keeps their text message history for a long time, even if one person deletes the message doesn’t mean the other person has as well. Facebook is also a dangerous place to vent because many people can see it and possibly print a screen grab of the page.

These are all warnings for people who are considering divorce in Indiana. It is never going to be beneficial for a person in a divorce proceeding to go on a rant, vent against their spouses or otherwise use these communication tools to contact a person they are divorcing.

This can quickly go from a one-time rant to a long-term headache if the evidence is preserved and used against them at trial. No one is immune to these traps if they are constantly using these forms of technology. The warning is clear — be careful what you tweet, text or post. It could come back to haunt you.
Continue reading

Contact Information
8320 Kennedy Ave
Highland, IN 46322
Phone: 219-836-2200
Fax: 219-836-9388

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Please do not include any confidential or sensitive information in a contact form, text message, or voicemail. The contact form sends information by non-encrypted email, which is not secure. Submitting a contact form, sending a text message, making a phone call, or leaving a voicemail does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Copyright © 2015 – 2025, Padove Law
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design