In Re: The Marriage of Noelle Christine Green and Prentiss Lamont Green Noelle Christine Green v. Prentiss Lamont Green ( 2012 )

Pursuant to Ind.Appellate Rule 65(D),
this Memorandum Decision shall not be
regarded as precedent or cited before
any court except for the purpose of
FILED
establishing the defense of res judicata,
collateral estoppel, or the law of the case.
Apr 23 2012, 9:30 am
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT:
CLERK
of the supreme court,
court of appeals and
MATTHEW G. GRANTHAM tax court
Bowers, Brewer, Garrett & Wiley, LLP
Huntington, Indiana
IN THE
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF NOELLE )
CHRISTINE GREEN and PRENTISS )
LAMONT GREEN, )
)
NOELLE CHRISTINE GREEN, )
)
Appellant-Petitioner, )
)
v. ) No. 49A02-1110-DR-932
)
PRENTISS LAMONT GREEN, )
)
Appellee-Respondent. )
APPEAL FROM THE MARION SUPERIOR COURT
The Honorable Robin L. Moberly, Judge
The Honorable Kimberly D. Mattingly, Magistrate
Cause No. 49D05-0703-DR-11176
April 23, 2012
MEMORANDUM DECISION - NOT FOR PUBLICATION
MAY, Judge
Noelle Green (Mother) appeals the magistrate’s entry regarding child support
modification. We dismiss.
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Mother and Prentiss Green (Father) divorced on July 9, 2008. On June 3, 2011, Father
filed a petition for modification of child support. The magistrate held a hearing on
September 9, and on September 12, entered into the minutes of court: “After taking this
matter [under advisement], comes now the Court and modifies support to $25 per week for
the period of [Father’s] unemployment, 4/27/11 to 8/12/11. Thereafter, support shall be $115
per week.” (App. at 8.)
DISCUSSION AND DECISION
Mother appeals the magistrate’s recommendation to modify Father’s child support
payment effective April 27, 2011.1 As the magistrate’s recommendation to which Mother
objects is “a nullity from which no appeal can be taken[,]” Breaziel v. State, 568 N.E.2d
1072, 1073 (Ind. Ct. App. 1991), we are unable to address her appeal. See also Ind. Code §
33-23-5-9(a) (providing that in civil trials, “a magistrate shall report findings in an
evidentiary hearing, a trial or a jury’s verdict to the court. The court shall enter the final
order.”). Accordingly, we dismiss.
Dismissed.
FRIEDLANDER, J., and BARNES, J., concur.
1
We acknowledge Judge Moberly signed a final order dated September 16, 2011, and that final order did not
include the language about which Mother complains. Mother explicitly states in her brief she is not appealing
the terms of that September 16 final order.
2