Opinion
NO. 2018-CA-001697-ME
02-14-2020
JESSE JAMES WADLINGTON APPELLANT v. KIARA WADLINGTON APPELLEE
BRIEF FOR APPELLANT: Jesse J. Wadlington, Pro Se Louisville, Kentucky NO BRIEF FOR APPELLEE.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED APPEAL FROM JEFFERSON CIRCUIT COURT FAMILY COURT DIVISION
HONORABLE LAUREN ADAMS OGDEN, JUDGE
ACTION NO. 18-D-503209-001 OPINION
AFFIRMING
** ** ** ** **
BEFORE: GOODWINE, TAYLOR, AND K. THOMPSON, JUDGES. TAYLOR, JUDGE: Jesse James Wadlington, pro se, brings this appeal from a November 13, 2018, order of the Jefferson Circuit Court, Family Court Division, rendering a domestic violence order of protection against Jesse. We affirm.
On October 31, 2018, Kiara Denise Wadlington filed a petition for a domestic violence order (DVO) against her father, Jesse Wadlington. Therein, Kiara alleged, in relevant part, as follows:
On 10/31/18, my estranged father, step mother and step sister came to my job demanding [to] speak to me. My manager told me to go to the back of the store until they left. When we thought they were gone, I went back to my station and continued to work at the drive thru window. They returned to the store and started belittling me and saying that I use and sell drugs from the parking lot, he threatened to call CPS [child protective services] and make up lies to get my child taken from me, he threatened that he was going to find out where I live . . . . At that my manager called the police and had him removed from the store property. He was told that if he returned he would be arrested. About three weeks prior, my father poured chocolate syrup into the gas tank of my car which almost caused me to wreck when the gas acceleration stopped while I was driving, and I had to swerve to keep from hitting another car. When I pulled into the gas station to check out what was going on, and opened the tank, I found chocolate all around the inside of the tank. I asked him about it [and] he blamed it on the mother of his child and ex-wife, even though my car was parked in his yard. After the incident, I had to replace the fuel pump, and I had a lock installed on the tank so no one could have access to the tank other than myself. With today's incident and his threat of putting chocolate syrup in the gas tank, I have had enough. He is upset over settlement money through his car insurance from an accident his wife and I were in. We both got checks and he felt that I should have given him a percentage of the check I received believing that I owe him. I instead moved out of his house and got my own place without his knowledge. There was never an agreement that I would give him any money. He just wants the money. I fear for my safety and I want Jesse to
stay away from me. I do not owe him any money. I want him to stop any and all communication, I want him to leave me alone.October 31, 2018, Petition/Motion for Order of Protection.
On November 13, 2018, the family court conducted a hearing upon Kiara's petition for a DVO. After the hearing, the family court made the following findings:
Parties both present on [Kiara's] petition . . . . [Kiara] suppl[emented] that [Jesse also] claimed falsely that she is a convicted felon (not true). He called CPS she believes earlier this month made anonymously, which he threatened he would do so. [Jesse] denies everything except that he did show up at her job. Past DV [domestic violence] history of [Jesse] with other women. Behaviors are abuse, threats, destroy property, he acknowledges there is conflict over money/settlement, therefore DV has occurred and likely to happen again. NC [no contact] DVO for 3 years.November 13, 2018, Calendar Order. The family court entered a DVO on the same day. This appeal follows.
To begin, in cases tried upon the facts without a jury, "[f]indings of fact, shall not be set aside unless clearly erroneous, and due regard shall be given to the opportunity of the trial court to judge the credibility of the witnesses." Kentucky Rule of Civil Procedure (CR) 52.01. And, when this Court reviews a decision by a family court to grant a DVO, the issue "is not whether we would have decided it differently, but whether the findings . . . were clearly erroneous or that it abused its discretion." Guenther v. Guenther, 379 S.W.3d 796, 802 (Ky. App. 2012) (citing Cherry v. Cherry, 634 S.W.2d 423, 425 (Ky. 1982)).
Jesse contends the family court erred by refusing to allow him to introduce two text messages into evidence and to allow Renee Wadlington to testify as a witness on his behalf. Jesse asserts the evidence was admissible to prove the existence of an agreement between the parties that Kiara owed him money for back rent.
Presumably, Renee Wadlington is Jesse Wadlington's wife.
We review alleged errors in the admission or exclusion of evidence at an evidentiary hearing under an abuse of discretion standard. Hawkins v. Rosenbloom, 17 S.W.3d 116, 120 (Ky. App. 1999). An abuse of discretion occurs if the court's decision to exclude the evidence "was arbitrary, unreasonable, unfair, or unsupported by sound legal principles." Goodyear Tire and Rubber Co. v. Thompson, 11 S.W.3d 575, 581 (Ky. 2000) (citation omitted). If the family court abused its discretion, we must then determine whether such error was reversible; in other words, whether the outcome would have been different absent the error. Hawkins, 17 S.W.3d at 121.
After reviewing Kiara's petition for a DVO and the video of the hearing, we do not believe Jesse was prejudiced by the exclusion of this evidence. Regarding the text messages, the record reveals Jesse read the text messages during his testimony. As for calling Renee Wadlington as a witness, no such request was made at the hearing. On appeal, Jesse's vague allegation is that "[e]yewitnesses to crime of violence and other crimes should be called as witnesses. [T]hose witnesses who can give particularly material testimony bearing on the guilt or innocence of the accused have also been designated as witnesses." Jesse's Brief at 4. However, the evidence that Jesse was trying to introduce was in support of his claim that Kiara owed him for back rent, not in defending against her DVO claim.
Jesse testified that he had filed an action in small claims court to collect the back rent. It was undisputed that he appeared at Kiara's work site to collect the rent and the police were called as a result thereof. Jesse's conduct at Kiara's worksite was sufficient to create her fear for her safety. The family court also noted on the record that Jesse had a history of domestic violence. --------
Accordingly, we are unable to discern any error in the court's ruling. Thus, we conclude that Jesse's contentions of error are without merit and affirm the family court's decision to issue a DVO.
For the foregoing reasons, the November 13, 2018, order of the Jefferson Circuit Court, Family Court Division, is affirmed.
ALL CONCUR. BRIEF FOR APPELLANT: Jesse J. Wadlington, Pro Se
Louisville, Kentucky NO BRIEF FOR APPELLEE.