Matter of Paternity of Humphrey

31 Citing cases

  1. McGinley-Ellis v. Ellis

    638 N.E.2d 1249 (Ind. 1994)   Cited 38 times
    Holding that "determining the profitability of the venture or operation paints a better picture of the spouse's financial wherewithal than would a mere toting up of any formal compensation or in-kind benefits."

    The Court of Appeals purported to evaluate the trial court's fidelity to the Indiana Child Support Guidelines under the abuse of discretion standard. It thus contravened the rule announced in Paternity of Humphrey (1991), Ind., 583 N.E.2d 133, which requires appellate review under the clearly erroneous standard. I. Facts and Procedural History

  2. Lea v. Lea

    691 N.E.2d 1214 (Ind. 1998)   Cited 41 times
    Noting a rebuttable presumption that the amount of the award that would result from the application of the Indiana Child Support Guidelines is the correct amount of child support to be awarded

    Stultz v. Stultz, 659 N.E.2d 125, 128 (Ind. 1995) (citing Kinsey v. Kinsey, 640 N.E.2d 42, 44 (Ind. 1994)). See In re Marriage of Richardson, 622 N.E.2d 178, 179 (Ind. 1993); Humphrey v. Woods, 583 N.E.2d 133, 134 (Ind. 1991). The Indiana Child Support Guidelines aid in the determination of the amount of child support that should be awarded and provide a measure for calculating each parent's share of the child support.

  3. Stultz v. Stultz

    659 N.E.2d 125 (Ind. 1995)   Cited 41 times
    Recognizing impact of child support guidelines

    We find this position to be most consistent with our state's strong emphasis on trial court discretion in determining child support obligations and our regular acknowledgement of the principle that child support modifications will not be set aside unless they are clearly erroneous. Kinsey v. Kinsey (1994), Ind., 640 N.E.2d 42, 44 (citing In re Marriage of Richardson (1993), Ind., 622 N.E.2d 178, 179, and Humphrey v. Woods (1991), Ind., 583 N.E.2d 133, 134). See Bruce. I. McDaniel, Annotation, Right to Credit on Child Support Payments for Social Security or Other Government Dependency Payments Made for Benefit of Child, 77 A.L.R.3d 1315 (1977 and 1991 Supp.).

  4. Garrod v. Garrod

    655 N.E.2d 336 (Ind. 1995)   Cited 15 times
    Rejecting the father's claim the trial court unfairly relied on his net worth in figuring support

    On appellate review of a child support order, the judgment will not be reversed unless it is clearly erroneous. Humphrey v. Woods (1991), Ind., 583 N.E.2d 133, 134; see also Ind.Trial Rule 52 (A) (claims tried without a jury or with an advisory jury are set aside only if clearly erroneous). Accordingly, we will reverse a support order which deviates from the Guidelines' presumptive amount only "where the trial court's determination is clearly against the logic and effect of the facts and circumstances before the trial court."

  5. Kinsey v. Kinsey

    640 N.E.2d 42 (Ind. 1994)   Cited 37 times
    In Kinsey, we explained that if the trial court considers the factors enumerated in Indiana Code Subsections 31-1-11.5-12 (a) and (b), and then finds the Guidelines' amount to be unjust or inappropriate, the court may state its factual basis for deviation and order a modification which deviates from the Guideline's presumptive amount.

    This Court has determined that reversal of a trial court's child support order deviating from the appropriate guideline amount is merited only where the trial court's determination is clearly against the logic and effect of the facts and circumstances before the trial court. Humphrey v. Woods (1991), Ind., 583 N.E.2d 133, 134. In the appellate review of modification orders, weight and credibility are disregarded, and only evidence and reasonable inferences favorable to the judgment are considered.

  6. Carr v. Carr

    600 N.E.2d 943 (Ind. 1992)   Cited 42 times
    Reversing trial court's post-secondary education expense order where it did not place any responsibility on the student to actually seek grants, loans, or employment

    This has recently been modified, however, by the adoption of the Indiana Child Support Guidelines (Guidelines). In Matter of Paternity of Humphrey (1991), Ind., 583 N.E.2d 133, we held that a trial court's support order would be disturbed only when it was clearly erroneous. We hold that when the apportionment of college expenses is at issue, the clearly erroneous standard articulated in Humphrey governs appellate review.

  7. Schmidt v. Denton

    987 N.E.2d 546 (Ind. App. 2013)

    Father argues that the trial court erred in declining his request to decrease his obligations with regard to Robert's college expenses. “[W]hen the apportionment of college expenses is at issue, the clearly erroneous standard articulated in [ In the Matter of Paternity of Humphrey, 583 N.E.2d 133 (Ind.1991) ] governs appellate review.” Carr v. Carr, 600 N.E.2d 943, 945 (Ind.1992).

  8. Anderson v. Jones

    No. 29A02-1104-DR-311 (Ind. App. Oct. 13, 2011)

    Father's Liability for E.A.'s College Expenses"[W]hen the apportionment of college expenses is at issue, the clearly erroneous standard articulated in [In Matter of Paternity of Humphrey, 583 N.E.2d 133 (Ind. 1991)] governs appellate review." Carr v. Carr, 600 N.E.2d 943, 945 (Ind. 1992).

  9. Stohler v. Stohler

    No. 48A04-1101-DR-51 (Ind. App. Sep. 15, 2011)

    Husband Must Reimburse Wife for Maria's Educational ExpensesHusband contends that the trial court erred in failing to take into account the approximately $36,000 Maria received from her godfather for educational expenses and the alleged fact that she qualified for a full scholarship to attend Indiana University. "[W]hen the apportionment of college expenses is at issue, the clearly erroneous standard articulated in [In Matter of Paternity of Humphrey, 583 N.E.2d 133 (Ind. 1991)] governs appellate review." Carr v. Carr, 600 N.E.2d 943, 945 (Ind. 1992).

  10. Marmaduke v. Marmaduke

    640 N.E.2d 441 (Ind. Ct. App. 1994)   Cited 13 times

    This has been modified however by the adoption of the Indiana Child Support Guidelines. In the Matter of Paternity of Humphrey (1991), Ind., 583 N.E.2d 133, reh'g denied, our supreme court announced the new standard for appellate review of support orders. This was the court's first opportunity to explore the issue since the adoption of the Indiana Child Support Guidelines on October 1, 1989.