by

In Indiana, marital property is commonly referred to as a “marital pot.” It is all the assets and liabilities a couple shares in the course of their marriage. When they are divorced, in essence everything gets poured into a “pot,” and it’s up to the court to decide the best way to equitably divide it all.

There is a legal presumption under Indiana law that property will be divided equally (50/50). However, parties can overcome that presumption by rebutting it with evidence to show why there should be a deviation. The goal isn’t always totally equal division, but rather equitable (fair) division in light of the circumstances.

Division of property is often one of the most contentious aspects of any divorce, and it’s one that often makes it to the appellate courts when one or both parties disagree with trial judge’s ruling. Such was the case in Carie v. Carie, recently before the Indiana Court of Appeals. Continue reading

by

When the adultery-promoting website Ashley Madison was hacked last month, the personal account information of millions of current and former site users was released. According to the Indy Star, it appears a number of email domains listed on the spouse-cheating site were .gov domains linked to city accounts in Indiana, Carmel and Greenwood, as well as to the Indiana State Police and the Indiana Department of Correction.

Officials were careful to caution that the appearance of those emails doesn’t necessarily mean anyone signed up for the service using their work email, but an investigation was being launched nonetheless. It’s not so much a moral issue, they say, as a potential violation of government email use policy.

But whether having an account tied to the site that encourages affairs causes workers trouble with their employer, it may not have a direct effect on one’s divorce. That’s because Indiana is a no-fault state when it comes to divorce. Continue reading

by

Fall is about to arrive in Northwest Indiana and the Chicago Area.  I have previously blogged concerning safety tips for bicyclists and believe that with the change in seasons that this is a good time to do so, once again.  Those of us who are bicyclists need to take extra precautions as daylight decreases and the need to be observant and observed increases.

In fact, a study published tin the September 1, 2015 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association and cited in a recent Science Daily posting indicates that bicycle injuries during the 15 year period from 1998 through 2013 increased substantially. Continue reading

by

The Indiana Supreme Court was asked to consider whether the trial court abused its discretion in granting child visitation to maternal grandparents after their daughter – the child’s mother – passed away.

In re: The visitation of L.- A.D.W., the state high court ruled visitation in this case was appropriate, even if it went against the father’s wishes to more strictly control such interactions. The court considered the best interests of the child in reaching its conclusion.

Although grandparents in Indiana face significant hurdles in obtaining visitation if it is against the express wishes of the parents, a strong argument can often be made where the bond is especially strong and/or when one of the parents has died.

Continue reading

by

When a court in Indiana issues a dissolution of marriage, it approves the divorce agreement as reached either by both parties through mediation or by the court following litigation or some combination of both.

These agreements encompass everything from child support and parenting time to division of property and spousal maintenance (also sometimes referred to as spousal support). These orders are final, and the only way they can be modified is through a request from the court for modification on the basis of a material change in circumstance.

In weighing recently a request for modification in Pohl v. Pohl, the Indiana Supreme Court noted the precedent for such action was established nearly 20 years ago in Voigt v. Voigt. The court recognized in that prohibition of modification of maintenance agreements may produce harsh results, but it is generally to be recognized unless the agreement so provides. Continue reading

by

Many people facing a divorce are hyper-focused on the here and now. And sometimes, it really is best to take things one day at a time.

Your divorce attorney, on the other hand, should be looking at your long-term well-being. That means figuring out a plan for division of assets, debts and benefits to sustain you not just over the next several months, but over years and even decades.

Even if a couple is not near retirement age, benefits accrued during the marriage are subject to division and must be carefully considered, just as one would weigh houses and other real estate. In fact, retirement benefits may actually be the largest asset a couple has between them.

Putting off the issue of retirement benefits or refusing to address them can be a big mistake. It’s important to understand that while divorce in Indiana calls for equitable division of assets, that does not always mean equal. Further, these funds are not automatically split in a divorce.
Continue reading

by

The issue of legality of same-sex marriage in America was settled recently with the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Obergefell v. Hodges.

The lead plaintiff, from Ohio, challenged a state ban on homosexual marriage on constitutional grounds. Indiana voters had previously passed a similar ban, but the law was overturned last year when a federal judge declared it unconstitutional. Still, the question remained open-ended in many other states – until now.

What it means for same-sex couples who choose to marry is that the union they form in Indiana will be recognized nationally wherever they go. It also means those couples will have the right to divorce anywhere too.
Continue reading

by

After two people decide they no longer wish to be married, one of the key points of contention often becomes division of assets. Indiana, as in most states, seeks equitable distribution, or a distribution that is fair given the circumstances.

But this is often a more complex process than it seems. Some assets can’t be simply cut down the middle, 50-50. In order for the distribution to be fair, marital assets must first be identified and then valuated.

For some elements, this can be straightforward. For example, the amount of money in a bank account can be clearly valuated. A retirement account or real property might be a bit more complicated, but will still generally come out to a fairly easily calculable figure. A business, however, is different. In order to properly evaluate a business, one must often analyze the history of the business, the company’s tangible assets, the earning capacity, the fair market value, good will and any other intangible value.
Continue reading

by

A recent attempt by an ex-wife to sue her former husband’s mistress for alienation of affection was thwarted by the fact that the contacts between husband and mistress did not occur frequently enough in the state of Mississippi for the state court to have jurisdiction. Primarily, the contacts occurred out-of-state, while husband was traveling as a pilot for a mail carrier.

The case of Nordness v. Faucheux, before the Mississippi Supreme Court, is what is referred to as “alienation of affection.”

Alienation of affection is a common law tort brought by a deserted spouse against a third party alleged to be responsible for the end of a marriage. It has been abolished in most jurisdictions, including Indiana. In Mississippi, however, it still remains a viable cause of action.
Continue reading

by

When it comes to child support calculations in Indiana, state courts are given guidelines by which to adhere. These guidelines take into account a host of factors, ranging from employment, wages, computations for prior-born or subsequent-born children, costs for child health insurance and child health care, education expenses and other factors.

But Ind. Child Supp. G. 3(F)(2) is clear: If the trial court finds support provided under the guidelines isn’t reasonable, just or appropriate, the court can deviate from those guidelines and administer an amount deemed more appropriate.

In the recent Indiana Supreme Court case of Bogner v. Bogner, the court once again underscored this point, with the justices noting the guidelines are not to be taken as “immutable, black letter law.” Rather, there are some circumstances in which flexibility is required.

In this Indiana child support case, father and mother divorced in 2007, and at that time, shared a 2-year-old child together. The court originally ordered father to pay $162 weekly. The following year, father petitioned court for a modification of payments. At that time, it was agreed he would pay $135 a week. During this time, mother and father alternated years under which they could claim the child as a dependent on tax returns.
Continue reading

Contact Information
8320 Kennedy Ave
Highland, IN 46322
Phone: 219-836-2200
Fax: 219-836-9388

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Please do not include any confidential or sensitive information in a contact form, text message, or voicemail. The contact form sends information by non-encrypted email, which is not secure. Submitting a contact form, sending a text message, making a phone call, or leaving a voicemail does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Copyright © 2015 – 2025, Padove Law
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design