Indiana trial court rules post hearing

[hoosierpapa4]

Soc, I live in Indiana.  Back in March, primary physical custody was changed to me.  At the time, there was only an issue of support amounts and calculations of arrearages (negative in this case) based upon a requested emancipation.  The Magistrate had both parties submit: Matters of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and proposed Order.  Both parties have submitted these to the Court back in May.

It has been 5 weeks since we responded with these documents to the Court, it's been 15 weeks since custody was modified.  If I am correctly reading the Trial Rules here: http://www.in.gov/judiciary/rules/trial_proc/index.html correctly at 53.1 and 53.2....

1) how long does the Magistrate have to respond to the above proposed Matters of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order?

2) Is there anything that my attorney can do to set temporary support while we wait on the Orders from the Court given the Conclusions of Law from the Order of the Court back in March?

Thanks in advance Soc, you're a life saver.

[socrateaser]

>1) how long does the Magistrate have to respond to the above
>proposed Matters of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order?

The court has 30 days from the time that the hearing took place. Howerver, your attorneys waited 10 weeks to submit proposed orders, so the judge can probably successfully argut that the delay is your fault, and therefore that the 30 days should begin at the time the proposed orders were submitted -- and possibly even the latest of the proposed orders. But, even here, you are beyond 30 days, if 5 weeks has passed (35 days).

>2) Is there anything that my attorney can do to set temporary
>support while we wait on the Orders from the Court given the
>Conclusions of Law from the Order of the Court back in March?

Your attorney should write or ask the judge if there's anything that he/she can do to expedite the ruling. I would have assumed that your proposed orders make support retroactive to the date of filing of the original motion to modify, which is probably a lot farther back than even 15 weeks. If not, then that would be a mistake, unless ID law mandates that support be made retroactive to the date of filing of the original motion/petition to modify.

As far as setting temporary support at a higher number, you could ask that the other party stipulate to a new temporary support order based on the new custody order be entered pending final judgment in this matter, but by the time you fight that out, you will probably have your final judgment, so I'd just concentrate on nudging the judge along, and if necessary, asking the Supreme Court for a special judge. Unfortunately, this latter request could really annoy the trial judge, which could cause your final order to look a lot worse than it otherwise might be.

You must weigh the risk v. the benefit, here.

[hoosierpapa4]

>>1) how long does the Magistrate have to respond to the
>above
>>proposed Matters of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order?
>
>The court has 30 days from the time that the hearing took
>place. Howerver, your attorneys waited 10 weeks to submit
>proposed orders, so the judge can probably successfully argut
>that the delay is your fault, and therefore that the 30 days
>should begin at the time the proposed orders were submitted --
>and possibly even the latest of the proposed orders. But, even
>here, you are beyond 30 days, if 5 weeks has passed (35
>days).

Actually, they were directed (both attorneys) to provide the proposed Matters of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Orders for the magistrates review within 21 days, it took both attorneys (by agreement) until the 28th day to submit them to the court.  From what you have stated, I should have expected an answer from the court sometime last week.

>
>>2) Is there anything that my attorney can do to set
>temporary
>>support while we wait on the Orders from the Court given the
>>Conclusions of Law from the Order of the Court back in
>March?
>
>Your attorney should write or ask the judge if there's
>anything that he/she can do to expedite the ruling. I would
>have assumed that your proposed orders make support
>retroactive to the date of filing of the original motion to
>modify, which is probably a lot farther back than even 15
>weeks. If not, then that would be a mistake, unless ID law
>mandates that support be made retroactive to the date of
>filing of the original motion/petition to modify.

Yes, retroactive to the date of filing on most of my petitions, one for modification of support (in 2003), another for emancipation of child (2004), birth of subsequent child - modification of support (2004), modification of custody (2005), modification of support based upon the custodial arrangement (2005).  In short, it's been over two and one-half years since I filed my initial request for a modification of child support.

The word that comes to mind is DILATORY ...  5 continuances, one because Santa Clause died (the person who played Santa was well known and loved, the attorney for opposing had to attend the funeral - sorry kids the only santa that I knew died then too).

>
>As far as setting temporary support at a higher number, you
>could ask that the other party stipulate to a new temporary
>support order based on the new custody order be entered
>pending final judgment in this matter, but by the time you
>fight that out, you will probably have your final judgment, so
>I'd just concentrate on nudging the judge along, and if
>necessary, asking the Supreme Court for a special judge.
>Unfortunately, this latter request could really annoy the
>trial judge, which could cause your final order to look a lot
>worse than it otherwise might be.

I agree whole-heartedly.  My attorney has acted as pro-tem in our county before and he's very reluctant to rock the boat.  It's still frustrating knowing that every week that goes by that I am overpaying my support by more than $300... and it's going to create one whale of a negative arrearage.

>
>You must weigh the risk v. the benefit, here.

Thanks again for your time Soc, you are a lifesaver.

[socrateaser]

>I agree whole-heartedly.  My attorney has acted as pro-tem in
>our county before and he's very reluctant to rock the boat.
>It's still frustrating knowing that every week that goes by
>that I am overpaying my support by more than $300... and it's
>going to create one whale of a negative arrearage.

This could change things. 130 weeks times $300 per week is $39,000 dollars, plus interest. Assuming that your ex doesn't have any reasonable income or assets, then you should tell your attorney that you want him to force the issue -- enough is enough. The delay is stealing your money, because it's unlikely that your ex will ever be able to pay you back.

On the other hand, if she has money, then the benefit is worth the risk, and you may as well wait a little longer -- but not much longer.