Nicole M. Davis v. Daniel J. Somers (mem. dec.) ( 2020 )

MEMORANDUM DECISION
Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D),
this Memorandum Decision shall not be FILED
regarded as precedent or cited before any Jan 30 2020, 10:18 am
court except for the purpose of establishing
CLERK
the defense of res judicata, collateral Indiana Supreme Court
Court of Appeals
estoppel, or the law of the case. and Tax Court
APPELLANT PRO SE
Nicole M. Davis
Cedar Lake, Indiana
IN THE
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
Nicole M. Davis, January 30, 2020
Appellant-Petitioner, Court of Appeals Case No.
18A-JP-2003
v. Appeal from the Lake Superior
Court
Daniel J. Somers, The Honorable Jeffrey L. Miller,
Appellee-Respondent Judge Pro Tempore
The Honorable Aimee M. Talian,
Magistrate
Trial Court Cause No.
45D06-1403-JP-258
Baker, Judge.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-JP-2003 | January 30, 2020 Page 1 of 4
[1] Nicole Davis (Mother) appeals the juvenile court’s order denying her petition to
modify and/or suspend the parenting time of Daniel Somers (Father). Mother
argues, essentially, that there is insufficient evidence supporting the juvenile
court’s order and requests that we grant her sole custody of their child, W.S.
(Child).
[2] The decision to modify custody rests in the sound discretion of the trial court.
E.g., Collyear-Bell v. Bell, 105 N.E.3d 176, 183 (Ind. Ct. App. 2018). Therefore,
in reviewing the order, we afford wide latitude and deference to the trial court.
Id. We will set aside the trial court’s findings or judgment only if clearly
erroneous, and may neither reweigh the evidence nor reassess witness
credibility. Id. at 184. Additionally, we must view the evidence most favorably
to the judgment. Id.
[3] Here, the juvenile court found as follows:
The Court finds it to be in the best interest of the minor child that
[Father] be awarded sole physical and legal custody of [Child].
Given that Mother and Father have an incredibly toxic
relationship that only gets worse as the months and years go by,
Court finds joint legal custody will not work for the parties.
Mother has consistently changed her position regarding various
issues with the child during this pending litigation. This has been
confusing for both [Child] and the Court. [Child] is often
disciplined by Mother for statements she makes to service
providers thus interfering with [Child’s] progress in mental health
treatment. Mother’s inconsistent and often suffocating behavior
has caused her relationship to deteriorate to the point where
[Child] doesn’t want to be around Mother. It is the intention of
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-JP-2003 | January 30, 2020 Page 2 of 4
the Court that intensive therapy will assist in repairing the
mother/daughter relationship.
***
During a suicidal episode of the child, the child requested to be
taken to the hospital. Mother required the child to pay the
medical bills because she wanted to be taken to the hospital.
Court orders Mother reimburse [Child] the money she took from
her to pay [Child’s] medical bills in the amount of $1,500.00. . . .
Appealed Order p. 1-2. There is evidence in the record supporting these
findings:
• The Guardian ad Litem explained that “[t]here is no consistency in the
requests made by [Mother]. They’re always evolving and changing into
something else.” Tr. Vol. II p. 105.
• The Guardian ad Litem recommended that Child be placed in Father’s
care. That recommendation was based on several factors: Child reported
being sexually active and using drugs while in Mother’s care; Child
reported feeling very depressed and thinking about hurting herself; and
Mother has been inconsistent with Child and the legal proceedings,
which is difficult for Child given her fragile emotional state.
Additionally, the Guardian ad Litem opined that Father is in the best
position to meet Child’s emotional needs and provide her with stability.
• On one occasion, Mother forced the teenaged Child “to write a hundred
times that her mother was a wonderful person and she was lucky to have
her,” id. at 124, resulting in Child obtaining a large knife and cutting
herself. Child had to be hospitalized as a result of the incident.
This evidence supports the juvenile court’s findings. And the findings, together
with the juvenile court’s assessment of Mother’s parenting skills and the
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-JP-2003 | January 30, 2020 Page 3 of 4
relationship between Mother and Child, readily support the order denying
Mother’s request to modify the parties’ parenting time arrangement.
[4] Mother’s arguments to the contrary essentially consist of requests to second-
guess the juvenile court’s assessment of witness credibility and to reweigh the
evidence, which we may not do. Therefore, we decline to reverse the juvenile
court’s order.
[5] The judgment of the juvenile court is affirmed.
Riley, J., and Brown, J., concur.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-JP-2003 | January 30, 2020 Page 4 of 4