Now Hiring Experienced Attorneys

Call Now

Call Now

Call Now

Blog

Can the Trial Court Hold Stepparents in Contempt for Interfering with Child Custody?

For The Love of a Child

The Power of a Trial Court To Hold Stepparents in Contempt for Interfering with Custody and Parenting Time

As domestic advocates, we sometimes receive questions about the rights of stepparents who may be perceived as, or actually are, interfering with the other parent’s custody and parenting time. This situation creates a serious (additional) emotional dynamic within post-divorce and paternity cases.

In other words, the allegation and legal issue concerns a person who is not a party subject to the trial court’s orders but who effectively thwarts these (custody and parenting time) orders to the benefit of his or her spouse and to the detriment of the other parent. Fortunately, most of these cases resolve themselves or come to the tolerable level over time and are mostly attributable to a subsequent spouse protecting his or her mate.

Where this is not the case, traditional legal wisdom has been to file a custody modification, contempt, or take other legal action against the parent for allowing this interference. In other cases, the aggrieved parent may seek a parenting coordinator to address such stepparent interference or other issues that routinely arise between the parties.

With a small minority of cases, the parent/stepparent are so closely aligned that none of this direct action against the parent are effective. A range of legal steps are sometimes utilized in an ad hoc way to try to address the acts or omissions of this non-party stepparent. Some of such may well be reflected in requests for protective orders and/or (statutory or trial rule) injunctions.

This noted, in a short, but powerful, published opinion it issued on February 8, 2012, the Indiana Court of Appeals squarely addressed this issue and developed the law in this arena (B.T. v. D.K. and K.K. 09A02-1108-JP-693 (2012)). Contempt lies against the stepparent. The case, B.T. v. D.K. and K.K., involved a mother and stepfather who committed outrageous behaviors to keep the father from seeing his child, N.T.

In reaching its decision to reverse the trial court in granting this non-party, stepparent’s request to change judge (Ind. Trial Rule 76), the Court made clear a person, notwithstanding status as a party, who knows of a trial court’s order, cannot aid in thwarting this order without being subject to the trial court’s contempt powers.

This is an important decision no matter what kind of case is at hand. Without this, a court order would always have enforcement issues if a third party (a non-party, such as a stepparent in this case) interfered and did the bidding of the party who did not want to be bound by the order. The stepfather in this case was (and is) subject to the trial court’s contempt powers, despite not being a party.

Indeed the ability of a trial court to hold a non-party in contempt has little to do with any given and controlling order. Instead, reflects the broad principle of administration of justice inherent in a court’s ability to regulate it affairs that is embodied in statutes and caselaw (Owen v. Vaughn, 479 N.E.2d 83 (Ind.Ct.App.1985)). Thus, a third-party familiar with a court order who interferes with it is undermining the very function of the judicial branch and may be contempted.

The Court of Appeals stated this as follows (from a prior appeal in the same case):

“We observe that one not a party who has knowledge of a court order but nevertheless aids, conspires with, and abets a party to action in violating a court order entered therein may be punished for contempt.” (internal cites and quotations omitted).

Trial courts are not hamstrung by this distinction (i.e., party versus non-party). Thus, a third party may not impede a trial court’s orders from executing. If so, he or she is not shielded from sanction by contempt powers of a trial court. This is what we all should want and expect from Indiana’s judiciary, be it a domestic relations case, complex civil matter, or criminal case.

A court’s orders are orders to be followed.

If you find yourself with a case where a third party is interfering with a court order, this decision may aid you and your counsel. We hope this blog post helps increase your working understanding of Indiana law and the role of the judiciary. To the extent it has, this blog post has met its objective.

In other words, and finally, a stepparent’s love of his or her step child or spouse is insufficient. This blog post is written by attorney Bryan L. Ciyou, Ciyou & Dixon, P.C. The firm handles cases throughout the State of Indiana.

Share on facebook
Facebook
Share on twitter
Twitter
Share on linkedin
LinkedIn
Share on pinterest
Pinterest
Share on email
Email

We Listen & Care

Proven & experienced attorneys successfully advocating & resolving complex cases for over 25 years

Quick Contact

Need to talk now? Fill out the quick form below and we will contact you directly.
Blog Categories

Get In Touch

We're available to answer your questions 24/7.

Related Videos

Contact Us

Please fill out the form below and we will be in touch with you shortly.

Ciyou & Dixon, P.C., is a law firm located in Indianapolis, Indiana. We serve clients in six core practice areas: family lawappellate practicefirearms lawgeneral practicepersonal injury and criminal law.

Copyright © 2021 Ciyou & Dixon, P.C., Attorneys at Law. All rights reserved. This Site does not provide legal advice; please review the disclaimer for other limitations. Privacy Policy

Based in Indianapolis and founded in 1995, Ciyou & Dixon, P.C. is a niche law firm focused on successfully dealing with the complexities of divorce, high-conflict child custody and family law. Known for their ability to solve extremely complex situations with high quality work and responsiveness, Ciyou & Dixon will guide you every step of the way. The family law attorneys at Ciyou & Dixon, P.C. will help you precisely identify your objectives and the means to reach your desired result. In addition, this practice focus is augmented by the firm's other three core areas, namely appellate advocacy, civil practice, and firearms law. Life is uncertain. Be certain of your counselSM.

Indianapolis Divorce Attorneys, Ciyou & Dixon, P.C. of Indianapolis, Indiana, offers legal services for Indianapolis, Zionsville, Noblesville, Carmel, Avon, Anderson, Danville, Greenwood, Brownsburg, Geist, Fortville, McCordsville, Muncie, Greenfield, Westfield, Fort Wayne, Fishers, Bloomington, Lafayette, Marion County, Hamilton County, Hendricks County, Allen County, Delaware County, Morgan County, Hendricks County, Boone County, Vigo County, Johnson County, Hancock County, and Tippecanoe County, Indiana.