Trial court erred in straying from child support statute in emancipation denial

The Indiana Court of Appeals reversed and remanded a trial court’s order for a mother to continue paying child support for her 19-year-old son, finding the trial court did not have the discretion to go outside the parameters of the termination of child support statute in its decision.

Cathy Baker argued the Hamilton Superior Court abused its discretion when it denied her petition to terminate child support because her son, who would soon be 19 years old, had plans to attend IUPUI as a freshman with a Century 21 Scholarship Fund that would pay for all four years of his schooling. Because of the scholarship, Baker’s son did not have to take out any loans for college.

Further, Baker’s her ex-husband, Douglas Grout, testified at a hearing that he was not asking for Baker to contribute to educational expenses if everything was being paid through grants and scholarships. But at the end of the hearing, the trial court denied Baker’s petition for emancipation and termination of child support, ordering her to pay $52 a week with no indication of when the payment of child support would cease.

Relying on Turner v. Turner, 983 N.E.2d 643, 646 (Ind. Ct. App. 2013), the appellate court reversed and remanded the trial court’s order, finding that Baker had shown prima facie error.

“Here, there was no evidence that the parties’ dissolution decree contained language requiring Mother to pay child support for Nicholas until the age of twenty-one. Instead, Mother petitioned the trial court to relieve her of the requirement to pay child support when Nicholas turned nineteen pursuant to Indiana Code section 31-16-6-6, which was the applicable law,” Judge James S. Kirsch wrote.

“The evidence showed that Nicholas turned nineteen on July 13, 2018 and that none of the exceptions contained in section 31-16-6-6 applied to him,” Kirsch continued. “We, therefore, conclude as in Turner, that the trial court did not have the discretion to go outside the parameters of the termination of child support statute and to extend Mother’s requirement to pay child support beyond what is required by law.”

The appellate court therefore remanded the trial court to enter an order granting Baker’s petition and ordered the repayment of all child support paid by Baker since July 13, 2018.

The case is Cathy Lynn Baker v. Douglas L. Grout, 18A-DR-1572.