Jason Mitchell v. Kayla Burdo (mem. dec.)


MEMORANDUM DECISION Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), this Memorandum Decision shall not be FILED regarded as precedent or cited before any Dec 29 2020, 8:21 am court except for the purpose of establishing CLERK the defense of res judicata, collateral Indiana Supreme Court Court of Appeals and Tax Court estoppel, or the law of the case. ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE Jeffrey A. Flores Justin R. Key Madison, Indiana Nicholas S. Veroff Goldberg Simpson, LLC Jeffersonville, Indiana IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA Jason Mitchell, December 29, 2020 Appellant-Petitioner, Court of Appeals Case No. 20A-DR-1211 v. Appeal from the Scott Circuit Court Kala Burdo, The Honorable Vicki L. Appellee-Respondent. Carmichael, Special Judge Trial Court Cause No. 72C01-1608-DR-120 Mathias, Judge. [1] Jason Mitchell (Father) appeals an order from the Scott Circuit Court that granted Kala Burdo’s (Mother) request for relocation to Florida and modified physical custody and parenting time as to their two children. Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 20A-DR-1211 | December 29, 2020 Page 1 of 17 [2] We affirm. Facts and Procedural History [3] Mother and Father were married in Florida in 2006 and have two children together: L.M., born in 2007 and X.M., born in 2014 (Children). The Children were born in Florida and the family lived there until February 2015, 1 when they moved to Scott County, Indiana. Father’s father had given them a house, and the couple wanted to “get away” to work on their relationship. Tr. pp. 33–34. [4] Approximately eighteen months later, in August 2016, the parties filed for divorce. The court subsequently entered an order dissolving the marriage and set a hearing to resolve custody and parenting time. After that hearing, the court, in August 2017, entered an order awarding the parties joint legal custody and awarding Mother primary physical custody “with the understanding and expectation that she may relocate to Florida.” Appellant’s App. p. 45. Mother had made “it clear” that, if granted custody, she intended to return. Id. at 44. [5] But those plans soon changed. Mother was “promoted through her employment with a significant pay raise and more benefits” and was “not eligible for a transfer to Florida until July 2018.” Id. at 40. So, in September 2017, Mother filed a petition requesting she be named the primary custodian 1 In 2011 or 2012, the family moved to Indiana, Tr. p. 32, but they returned to Florida a few months later, id. at 32–33. Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 20A-DR-1211 | December 29, 2020 Page 2 of 17 until her scheduled move. Father subsequently filed his own petition to modify custody, and the court2 held a hearing in April 2018. [6] On April 17, 2018, the court entered an order in which the parties agreed to share physical and legal custody of the Children, with Father being named the primary custodian. Then, in August, Father filed a petition requesting emergency custody and suspension of Mother’s parenting time. Four days later, Mother …

Original document

Add comment