“I DON’T Care About Your Excuses Anymore!” — Judge GOES OFF Hard

Hinzugefügt: 2026-05-30

[00:00:00]When did you file? There are a lot of these things that I need to find a >> Oh, I'm sorry. It's our motion. This is the motion objecting to to mother's superseding objection.

[00:00:10]>> What day did you file it?

[00:00:11]>> Oh, what day did I Oh, I filed it.

[00:00:14]No, I don't have the date I file. I have the date that I signed it, but I don't >> Well, I got a lot of tabs to turn to.

[00:00:19]So, let me see if I can find it.

[00:00:20]>> Or if you just tell me what tab you're on, I can go to that one. So, I can do whatever whatever's easier.

[00:00:29]I think I I filed them all the same.

[00:00:34]>> All right. Well, the first motion of any kind that I find filed in this file is the motion to dismiss the counter petetition for civil contempt filed February the 6th of 2026.

[00:00:47]>> I can do that one, judge. That's one where uh there was a initial uh petition, there was an answer, and then Miss Huie decided to just do an amended one without asking for permission from the court to do that. I understand she's prosay and and and and but but that's the reason why we we asked for that. Miss Huey, the law you're unfortunately held to the same standard as if you had a lawyer representing you. And under the rules of civil procedure, once a petition is filed and a responsive pleading, an answer has been filed, then you cannot admen the original petition without leave of court. You would have to file a motion asking for the court to allow you to amend your petition and then have that heard before you can actually file that. So I have to grant the motion to dismiss the counter petetition for civil contempt and then but you're free to file a motion to amend and you know and normally that would be granted. So it seems rather ciruitous and unnecessary to do it this way but that is what the rules require.

[00:01:52]>> Your honor, may I have permission to respectfully request leave to amend here in the hearing?

[00:01:58]>> You can respectfully request what? um permission to amend um that petition here in the hearing or would you need that?

[00:02:06]>> A written motion to amend under the rules?

[00:02:09]>> Yes, sir.

[00:02:10]>> So, she files that and serves that on me, that might be something we just agree to.

[00:02:13]>> If you file your motion to amend and set forth the reasons why you want to amend it, then serve that on opposing council.

[00:02:21]And I think at that point you would uh be entitled to have it heard if he doesn't agree. But I would think he would likely agree. So, all right. Then we have the motion to dismiss the counter petition for civil contempt that Miss Huey has filed.

[00:02:41]That was filed February the 6th. That was actually the one we were talking about.

[00:02:46]And Miss Huy, you have filed a motion to dismiss the counter petition for civil contempt.

[00:02:52]>> Yes, sir.

[00:02:54]>> What is your basis for that motion? um because I gave notice to um regarding the move and there was no written objection. There was no verbal objection and um I followed the rule of um the the parenting plan as I understood it.

[00:03:17]>> Mr. Voucher, do you have anything to respond?

[00:03:19]>> Uh no. Well, let me say this as far as I'm I don't have >> You might want to turn that microphone towards you because >> Can you hear me? Okay. Okay. She can't I have a I'm talk really loud so I usually have to but but just to make sure that she gets it. Um uh as far as as far as that goes, I would argue that that is a case that is that is a material thing that should be set at the hearing uh for the the we have a number of hearings that we may do, but that's not for today. I mean, that's for that'll be an ev evidentiary hearing that to determine that.

[00:03:54]>> Miss Huey, the civil contempt petition that's been filed is a factual issue and it's also a legal issue. And for that reason, just to say that you want to dismiss it because you felt like you complied with it. That's a an allegation of fact which will have to be proven at a hearing. So, while at that hearing, I'm going to pass your motion to dismiss. Um and we'll just reserve that for the hearing in this on the motion for contempt uh to allow both sides to be fully heard on that.

[00:04:24]All right. The next is a motion objection to interrogatories and request for admissions that was set uh was filed March the 9th. I show it was supposedly set from April the 8th.

[00:04:36]Did you appear on April the 8th and have a hearing?

[00:04:39]>> No, we moved it, judge. We moved it to today. We've not heard we've not heard any of these. Is that our motion objecting to the mother's superseding discovery responses?

[00:04:48]>> The one you filed March the 9th, 2026.

[00:04:52]Motion objection to interrogatories and request for admission.

[00:04:56]>> Correct, judge. That's the one where there was there the mother filed three separate petitions in this case. A modify parenting plan, modified child support and conversion of funds. We answered the interrogatories and requested for admissions. And then uh seven hours later, she sent us 25 more interrogatories, 16 more requests for production of of documents and 87 additional uh requests for admissions.

[00:05:23]So what I would ask judge, she already she did that once. She I guess maybe she didn't like the responses, so she decided to take a second bite of that.

[00:05:30]And I would argue that that is uh u not not uh proper.

[00:05:37]>> There is a rule both a local rule and a rule of civil procedure that somewhat limits the amount of of uh questions and interrogatories and requests for admissions that you can uh submit. I'm going to grant the objection to the subsequent or superseding correct set of interrogatories.

[00:05:57]But again, if you feel that there is an additional need for something that is not fully answered in the first set of interrogatories, then you can file a motion asking for the court to approve additional discovery. Thank you.

[00:06:12]>> All right. Then we're moving to a motion for a temporary parenting plan.

[00:06:21]And Miss Huey, I've already dealt with that. Uh, I cannot adopt a new parenting plan on a temporary basis without a full hearing.

[00:06:30]>> Yes, sir. Um, and may I just clarify? My intent is not to to limit or um restrict the parenting time or that he's in any danger. I'm simply seeking um a parenting plan that is reflecting the reality because we've had substantial change. Um, my older son has um reached age majority. it's just dealing with our younger son. Um, and trying to reflect actual parenting arrangements and reducing conflict and communication issues was my goal.

[00:06:59]>> And I understand that and that's that's a you know an admirable um goal that you may have. But all I'm saying is that unless it's agreed to, I cannot grant or even conduct a hearing to uh adopt a temporary parenting plan absent showing of a substantial risk of harm or injury to the child. So we'll reserve that and perhaps you two can come to an agreement in mediation or whatever.

[00:07:27]>> There's a supplemental motion to determine a child support or rearage.

[00:07:31]>> Your honor, the same that was the mother's motion. my uh uh she's trying to seek a uh a uh uh setting a rear from a date of of divorce to present. I would argue that's also premature. We haven't done any mediation and that would be something for a final hearing.

[00:07:49]>> Miss do you want to be heard on that? It is typical that that would be a hearing that would be conducted. That would be an issue that would be heard during the final hearing.

[00:08:00]>> Um yes sir, I understand that. Now, I was just simply seeking to I didn't realize that that was part of the final hearing. I um was seeking to just bring matters before the court for resolution.

[00:08:12]>> All right. Then we have a supplemental motion for reimbursement of child related expenses.

[00:08:18]Again, this would be in my opinion a part of the final hearing as well. If there are additional expenses, child related expenses that need to be addressed, then that normally is done at the final hearing and it will be based on what the final what the prior temporary parenting plan or permanent parenting plan provided.

[00:08:39]Now, we're looking at motion to compel discovery responses that Mr. Huey has filed.

[00:08:45]>> That's correct, Judge. We uh on January 20th, we sent interogatory responses on a number of questions and I can submit these if you want to uh later and you could do that. But there were several things uh that were just not answered.

[00:08:59]She objected to it and she just didn't answer. There was let me think one one interrogatory in production of documents. There's one, two, three uh maybe six of those. uh and and uh she just to answer uh >> and that and like for for instance one uh I said uh number 20 of the interrogatory please state with specificity all complaints and allegations on which you intend to rely on as grounds listing specific instances of misconduct by father and state the names and addresses of persons who witnessed or have knowledge of any incident that you have listed. and she she just uh wouldn't answer that one.

[00:09:39]Objective to that. And then uh do you want me to go through each one or you want to rule on each one of these?

[00:09:45]>> I don't want to rule on them at all, but I will do what I'm required to do.

[00:09:49]>> Well, fair enough, judge. So, we just want to know what she's going to say bad about the father and we need to know what she's going what things she's going to rely on at trial and that was the point of that interrogatory. Miss Huey, uh, under the rules of civil procedure, when I first started practicing law, these rules had just been adopted and older older attorneys used to moan about the fact that it eliminated trial by ambush, which they really liked. They used to, you know, not give the other side the information about what was going to happen and they could ambush them at trial. the rules of civil procedure when adopted were designed to eliminate that and so that both sides are entitled to have all information that's going to be introduced at the final hearing in the case. So there's no um unless there's privileged information and that's very limited. It would be required to be divulged as to all of the information that's been requested. So do you want to have anything to say about why some of these answers were not provided? Um, your honor, I responded in good faith and provided substantial information in my responses and to the extent that there are specific deficiencies, I do remain willing to supplement appropriate requests.

[00:11:03]However, there were several requests that raised privacy over breath and proportionality concerns.

[00:11:12]>> And you want to point that point to me?

[00:11:14]Number one, what I'm going to do is I'm going to order that you supplement your answers within a certain period of time within 30 days that you file a supplement uh to your answers to discovery. And under the rules, you either answer them or if you believe it's not uh appropriate, then you can file an objection to it. But you cannot just simply fail to answer it. So, within the next 30 days, what I'm going to uh put in order down here is that you supplement your answer and you fully answer all of the questions. Any question that you believe is objectionable, then you have to file an objection stating uh with particularity and specificity what it is that you object to under the rules of civil procedures.

[00:11:58]>> Yes, sir. Just let me add that that first one I mentioned was that the second I'll just just kind of go over but and I know you just said basically do all of them but the next was that we asked for a earnings record by the social security administration that she provide that that shows her past income.

[00:12:13]She didn't do that. Also we're asking for statements of her checking savings money market account uh uh and only since the date of the divorce. So it only goes back to 2020.

[00:12:24]>> Why would that information be relevant?

[00:12:26]Well, it's going to as far as child support, that's going to be an issue.

[00:12:29]Whether or not she has other uh income, and the same thing as far as Vinmo, PayPal, Amazon, I just need to know what her income level is. That that's why that would be appropriate. And as far as social security, I need to know whether or not she's undermployed, overmployed, whatever. But again, for social I mean for child support issues, uh that we do that. And then um then I asked for a driver's license on number 16. And also I asked for photographs of her home including the outside the yard and the interior room. And the reason I'm doing that is because this is a custody case and I want to know to make sure that there's appropriate uh she has appropriate uh place for the children to live. So those are the those are the ones that that that and let me say this too, your honor. when she sent her interrogatories. I sent her a deficiency letter back some time ago outlining that, but I'm going to put that in the order also that he she has 30 days to answer that.

[00:13:27]>> All right. Interrogatory number nine was um I'm sorry, interrogatory number 20 says, "Please state with specificity all complaints and allegations of which you intend to rely upon as grounds, listing specific incidents of misconduct by the father and state the names and addresses of all persons who have witnessed and or have knowledge of any of the incidents you have listed." In the new response, Miss Huie was the responding party objects to this interrogatory to the extent it seeks an exhaustive catalog of all allegations, incidents, and potential witnesses as such request is overly broad, unduly burdensome, and not proportional to the needs of the case.

[00:14:06]What you would need to understand is is that he has a right to know anything that you're going to try to rely upon when you get to court. So if you intend to rely upon any type of information or incident involving Mr. Huey, you must divulge that and answer this question fully. If you do not, then when you come to court and you attempt to get into something that was not supplied to in your answer to interrogatory, then the court will be if he objects, then the court will be forced to exclude that information. Do you understand that?

[00:14:41]>> Okay. All right. So to the extent that number 20, my ruling is is that she will have 30 days to supplement that answer >> with those instructions.

[00:14:52]>> Thank you.

[00:14:52]>> Um there's a question number three.

[00:14:55]Provide a copy of your earnings record as provided by the Social Security Administration and a copy may be obtained from uh the Social Security Administration. you you have objected to that as cumulative, overly broad and not proportional to the needs of this case, not reasonably calculated to the lead to discovery. You want to answer or supplement your answer or objections on that?

[00:15:22]>> Um, yes sir. My understanding is and from what uh Mr. Belture just stated that it was from the the point of divorce forward and I have supplied my tax returns and I don't under I'm not understanding why that is not adequate.

[00:15:40]>> When was this divorce?

[00:15:42]>> 2024.

[00:15:43]>> Okay. So you want her entire >> social just let me finish.

[00:15:48]>> I'm sorry. Uh, do you want her entire Social Security Administration list of earnings back to the date she first got a job?

[00:15:57]>> Well, I don't need that. I need the last five years. I just want to make sure that what she was making is what she is making. So, basically, just to make sure that she's not >> When she was divorced, excuse me for interrupting you.

[00:16:09]>> Yeah. No, that's okay.

[00:16:09]>> Uh, when she when you when they were divorced, was there a calculation of child support?

[00:16:15]>> There was.

[00:16:15]>> All right. then they're bound by that calculation of child support and the showing of her income absent some showing of of fraud. So my ruling will be she's required to prove what her income is from the date of the divorce forward. That's right.

[00:16:28]>> She says she has supplied copies of her income taxes and that would seem to me for the years following the divorce and that's all I'm going to require to provide.

[00:16:39]With all due respect, judge, the only thing I would ask is just copies of her statements, checking just to make sure that everything is listed on her taxes are also the >> Well, we haven't got to that one where that one is next one, right?

[00:16:52]>> Fair enough. Yes.

[00:16:52]>> So, as to the one that says that they're requesting a copy of your earnings record, I'm not going to require you to do that, but a copy of your actual tax return form since 2024, the divorce will need to be supplied to Mr. Belure and we'll go from there. The next question is copies of your statements for your checking savings uh in retirement accounts which you've had an interest since June 17th. You objected to that?

[00:17:20]Uh you provided statements but redacted transaction descriptions for deposits and withdrawals which may be relevant.

[00:17:26]You want to be heard on that?

[00:17:28]>> Um yes sir. I redacted transactions. I did not redact any um withdrawals or deposits. I left all of that visible. Um I left um all of the large transactions, for example, mortgage payments and things like that. All of that has been visible. I only redacted daily transactions that seemed overreaching and I didn't understand why those were pertinent to the case.

[00:17:52]>> Mr. Voucher, >> Judge, you know, when when we look at these statements, there's a lot of things that you could find. If she goes to the liquor store three times a day, that might be relevant. I don't know. It might be that she's spending if she's going on big trips. There's lots of things that potentially could could be discoverable and that's the reason why we ask for an I mean I'm going to um order that you have to provide a unredacted copy but it will be filed with Mr. Velure under a protective order of this court that it's not to be used for any purpose other than for preparation for trial. And so if he obtains an unredacted copy, he is to hold that in his file under this protective order. And that's the best I can do. He is correct. We have cases that people are are using their accounts uh for transactions to purchase liquor at liquor stores on a repeated basis right before a visitation takes place or you know that there are other expenses that are inappropriate. So the transaction record can be relevant, but the best I can do is order that it be provided unredacted and that uh it be held by Mr. Belchure under this protective order.

[00:19:02]>> And your honor, is that just are we looking at I mean bank statements?

[00:19:08]>> What he's asked for is a copy of your checking, savings, a money market, or investment or retirement accounts of which you've had an interest. This is all about your income. And what he's looking to see is if there are some people who um try to hide their extra income that they make a representation that they make only, you know, this amount of money, but that their bank account records show that there's a substantial greater amount that is being deposited into the account or that they're spending substantially greater amounts of money than their income would justify. And that's the reason that this becomes relevant.

[00:19:48]>> And Okay. Yes, sir. So, to be clear, um only my bank account, um checking my checking account, savings account, or retirement account is what we're talking about. Is that correct?

[00:20:01]>> That is in number eight of the request that says, "Please provide copies of your statements. If you refer to Mr. Belchure's number eight on his interrogatory is a request for production of documents. Please provide copies of statements for your checking, savings, money market, investment, and or retirement accounts of which you've had an interest since June 17th of 2024.

[00:20:25]>> That's that's the question that that I'm ordering. You have to file unredacted copies and then that will be filed with them under a a protective order. Same thing goes for number nine, which is copies of Venmo, PayPal, Amazon, Zel, I don't even know what Zel is. Zeli, Cash App, or other such accounts that you might have. And again, it's the same principle that they're going they're looking for any indication that you're actually uh have a greater income than what you are representing. And not to say that will be the case, but they have a right to see those unredacted. So number eight and number nine, you'll have 30 days to provide that information. It will be provided under this order which provides that that information will be filed under seal to Mr. Belture and he will not be able to use or disseminate that information uh beyond trial preparations.

[00:21:22]>> May I ask one more clarifying question?

[00:21:24]>> All right.

[00:21:25]>> Regarding number nine, where there's Vinmo, um PayPal, Zel, things like that.

[00:21:30]Um, do are all of the the because a lot of those are persontoperson transactions. May I redact the names or do the names need to be included as well?

[00:21:44]>> Any reason why if you're looking for the income information, there's really no reason the names would have to be at this point. Let me say this. We're going to allow you to redact the names. If Mr. Belchure later determines that that a particular transaction is one he needs to follow up on, then he can apply to the court to have that name unsealed.

[00:22:04]>> Yes, sir.

[00:22:05]>> All right. Number 16, a copy of your driver's license.

[00:22:10]>> And judge, I I provided a copy of my driver's license. The only thing that I redacted was my driver's license number.

[00:22:19]>> Thanks.

[00:22:21]Number 21. provide photographs of your home, including the outside, the yard, and each interior room, including bedrooms and bathrooms.

[00:22:31]Now, you have any objection to providing those?

[00:22:36]>> Um, your honor, I guess I just didn't understand the the reason. My um ex-husband has been here several times, has been invited to come in, and has declined. So I didn't understand especially in those circumstances how that was pertinent information and what could be gained from that.

[00:22:56]>> Where your children or child is going to be residing and where do you what you don't have to tell me the address but where are you?

[00:23:03]>> Mount Juliet.

[00:23:04]>> Okay. um where you are residing with your minor child does become an issue for the court to determine if the environment that you're providing is appropriate. And all I understanding he's asking is for you to provide copies of the photographs of the interior of your home, which normally you would do when you come into court to show that it's a good place for your son to uh to live. So, I'm going to order that you do that. It's a little bit unusual to require you to make photographs, but um I can't really produce I can't require her to produce photographs if they she doesn't have them. I can't make her go out and take photographs. Um >> well, let me say this in the alternative I guess if you court could order a time maybe for us to go out and I could take the photographs.

[00:23:54]>> Oh, you want to take them? I want Mr. Bel.

[00:23:57]>> I I guess honestly, judge, it feels very invasive and intrusive. Why?

[00:24:03]>> Especially when the father's been invited in before and has declined to be he's specifically been invited to see it. Come inspect, come see where your son lives and has declined.

[00:24:16]There are um photos of the apartment complex online.

[00:24:23]>> The idea that it is invasive and intrusive is correct. And unfortunately when two people come before the court and they in the I don't know either one of you. So I don't know anything about your house. I haven't been invited to your house. And if I or one of the other judges have to make the decision then having the most amount of information, the greatest amount of information about the conditions, the circumstances, what it looks like. As I've said, most of the time the person who's seeking to have the child live in that home brings photographs before the court to show this is a great environment. Here is his room. Here's what it looks like to satisfy the judge that that the uh child will be living in an appropriate environment. I am not going to order that she has to provide those photographs. She can either produce them or not. Um that's up to her. But I I will say that obviously the judge who hears this case is going to want to know what kind of environment it is. And if she doesn't provide them, then Mr. Belure, you and your client can argue to that judge or to me that her failure to provide copies of photographs that show what the environment was like may be an indication that there's an inappropriate environment.

[00:25:36]>> If she provides though, can she at least I mean, if she does take pictures and she intends to show those, will she provide those to me ahead of time?

[00:25:42]intend to take photographs and show them at court, you have to provide a copy to Mr. Belure.

[00:25:48]>> If you do not, then that's your choice.

[00:25:50]But I'm not going to require her >> uh to go out and take photographs of her own home and then mail them to you. So she if she's going to take them and use them at trial, then she has to provide them to you.

[00:26:01]>> Okay.

[00:26:02]>> Um All right. That concludes the discovery issues. If I understand correctly, you've already dealt with your motion to dismiss the amended petition, which you can do. You have a motion to change venue, judge. The only reason I say that is the children now uh are residents of Wilson County. They've lived there for more than 6 months. The mother now is in Wilson County. The uh >> Where's your client?

[00:26:29]>> My client still lives here, but I'm out of Wilson County, so it's not a big deal. Listen, it was a very pleasant drive, but it did take an hour and a half to get from Mount Juliet to here.

[00:26:40]It was very nice this morning, but that's the reason why I'm asking that.

[00:26:43]Just it's just for basically uh convenience sake for the mother, the children, uh me. But let me say this. If she wants to have it here, I'm okay.

[00:26:53]>> I don't care where this case is.

[00:26:55]>> And if you want to have it heard in in Wilson County since you live there, um then that's where the child is. That's where the the court that would have the greatest of opportunity to hear it. I'll be glad to change the venue to Wilson County. Do you want it changed to Wilson County?

[00:27:12]>> Uh well, so my concern is avoiding prejudicing the um the matters that are already pretending or pending before the court and particularly the unresolved financial issues, the custodial account issues that arose while this was before the court and my older son has now reached the age of majority.

[00:27:30]So, I'm just concerned about moving it it extending the times, additional costs and things like that.

[00:27:38]>> You know, I think it would be less cost if it was done in Wilson County because everybody's there. Almost everybody's there except for the father and the father.

[00:27:45]>> Normally, it's normally it's the non it's the person who doesn't live in Wilson County who is objecting to it. Uh I don't care if you object to it being moved to Wilson County, we'll leave it here. If you want it moved to Wilson County, it should not make any difference. All that happens is that all of the pleadings that are here get transferred over under a court order to Wilson County Chancery Court.

[00:28:10]>> Um, your honor, I I I object to moving.

[00:28:13]I would like to keep it in Dixon County.

[00:28:15]>> Remain here.

[00:28:15]>> It'll stay here.

[00:28:16]>> There's a motion to compel mediation. We have a local rule that requires mediation. So, the parties will be required to undergo mediation until at some point before the final hearing.

[00:28:26]>> That's right. The only reason I filed that is after the discovery, the first set of discovery was submitted, I had asked to set mediation up and she uh refused and said that only until we provided a 408 proposal would she even consider mediation. And I I don't see that as a barrier to uh and I have an email that states, but either way, your honor, we'll set mediation ASAP. And lastly, there's a motion to dismiss the planet's petition to modify child support. And obviously, the issue of child support is one of those things that in my opinion needs to be heard at the final hearing.

[00:29:02]>> The only reason I put that in there, judge, is in her petition, she was asking that it be retroactive to the date of divorce.

[00:29:09]>> Well, that'll be for argument at the final hearing. You cannot get retroactive modif you cannot get a retroactive modification of child support when there's a court order down.

[00:29:19]um other than the fact that you could get it from the date of filing a petition to modify. In other words, got a court order down assess child support.

[00:29:28]That is that is controlling until you file a petition to modify. Once you file a petition to modify, if it takes 6 months or a year or two years to get it heard, the retroactive modification can be to the point where you filed your petition to modify. But you can't >> can't go from the petition to modify back to the date of the actual divorce because that's a race judicata is the term the term we use to determine that.

[00:29:55]>> Yes, sir. And I petition.

[00:29:58]>> Mr. Belchure, would you draw an order, please, reflecting all of my rulings and then submit that to Miss Huie?

[00:30:04]>> I will, Judge. Thank you.

[00:30:06]>> All right. Thank you, Miss Huie. You may leave our hearings.

[00:30:25]Good morning.

[00:30:31]Judge, we've got a few matters. Nicholas Bellamy of the McGomery County Bar, your honor, represent Michael Thomas. We've got a few motions pending before the court this morning. We have resolved a few by agreement.

[00:30:44]>> We should probably start with those. The motion to compel discovery filed by Mrs. Thomas. We have agreed. We will enter an agreed order uh requiring Mr. Thomas to complete those discovery responses within 14 days of today.

[00:31:01]>> Go ahead.

[00:31:03]>> With respect to Mrs. Thomas's motion for contempt regarding the alimony payment, alimony, the May alimony payment or support payment, temporary support, child support payment, uh were paid today. Um, >> are you >> also the auto insurance that was cut off will be cut back on today.

[00:31:25]>> That is correct.

[00:31:26]>> And then there's a health insurance issue that will be reserved.

[00:31:31]>> All right.

[00:31:32]>> So, that takes care of the motion to compel discovery and the motion for contempt. By my count, that leaves Mr. Thomas's motion to reduce support uh motion to review DNA testing and then his emergency motion for immediate return of the minor children.

[00:31:50]That kind of complicates everything. I anticipate depending if the court's able to take up a hearing today. I do anticipate having a contested hearing on that motion.

[00:32:01]>> All right. Well, let me run through I expect that will take some time. Let me run through the remaining cases and see where we are and I'll come back to you.

[00:32:08]Very well. Thank you, judge.

[00:32:28]All right.

[00:32:40]>> There's I ask I filed a motion for Mr. Bates to be arraigned and for a trial date to be set.

[00:32:49]All right. So, Mr. Himleberg is here to represent him on the criminal contempt.

[00:32:56]Is that correct?

[00:32:57]>> Actually, Judge, >> Mr. Jagger, >> you still represent him on the civil matters.

[00:33:18]resp.

[00:33:30]>> All right, then. Let's reign Mr. Bates on the criminal contempt. You wish a formal reading of that allegation?

[00:33:38]>> No, judge.

[00:33:41]>> Le not guilty will be entered. Do you want to set it for a hearing then?

[00:33:46]>> Yes, your honor. We can if you got Mr. Jagger's calendar, do I need to correspond with him and give >> available dates?

[00:33:56]>> Well, doesn't does it necessarily have to be heard in front I guess it should be heard in front of me. I've >> already The allegation is dealing with testimony that happened in front of you during the hearing.

[00:34:09]>> All right. June 15th or 16th. You have the 16th. Your honor, I'm here on a final hearing, McNeel versus McNeel in front of Judge U. Wallace >> on the 16th.

[00:34:21]>> On the 16th and then on the 15th, Miss Duke and I have a matter already said in Humphrey's juvenile McBride versus McBride.

[00:34:29]>> Okay.

[00:34:31]>> Apologize. Neither one of those dates.

[00:34:36]>> Well, I have the 26th of May. I don't know what uh that looks like.

[00:34:44]>> Well, your honor, you have a fi a Tyson versus Tyson competing orders, a final order in Mangram, final hearing in Mangram, and then hearing I don't know what it was, King versus Oliva.

[00:34:56]That's just me. I know there's >> And then the Marlin case you said, is that going to take most of the day? the >> on the 29th >> your honor I don't think I don't think it will take most of the day the 20 that would be fine to set it if he's available on the 29th it's a contempt and a modification of alimony spousal support that's the one where they tragically lost one of their children that was just a short that was an apparent that was just a >> Mr. Bates has reached out to me to ask to continue.

[00:35:35]>> Marlin 29.

[00:35:39]>> What Bates? Motion for content.

[00:35:47]>> Thank you, honor.

[00:35:48]>> Thank you.

[00:35:49]>> You may pardon.

[00:35:53]>> It was served on him and your Mr. P. He accepted service and I can show you. I mean, I can get you I can email you another petition, but he accepted service on it.

[00:36:03]>> Yes, sir.

[00:36:04]>> Thank you, judge.

[00:36:05]>> You're welcome.

[00:36:09]>> Okay. Then then, your honor, the only other motion that's on the docket for today is my motion for your honor to consider attorney's fees. Your honor will recall, we tried this ma matter over a series of five days um starting in August of 24 and finally ending in August of 25 um and during that period of time we were able to reach an agree after testimony we were able to reach an agreement on property division and then you're then we proceeded with on the issue of adoption of a parenting plan.

[00:36:43]Both parties had requested attorneys fees. Your honor took it under adisement after the August hearing and then issued your order in September.

[00:36:53]And what we are asking your honor is we have filed a motion uh requesting that the court assign attorney's fees and extraordinary fees particularly the guardian aditum fee um and also a mediator's fee. Your honor will recall um I'm not going to bel labor the points on doing it. I would request that if the court considers an award of attorneys fees that that I be allowed to submit my hourly billing and your honor determine which portion would be attributable um particularly on the mediator's fee.

[00:37:28]Your honor, you recall we went to mediation one time. We came back to court. This was when Mr. Bates was represented by Mr. Potter. Um we >> that's where he fired Mr. Potter >> in the middle of mediation. He fired Mr. Potter. We went back to try to resolve the mediation. We tried to resolve the property issues and he so we incurred an additional mediator's fee and time at that and Mr. Bates became disheartened with Mr. Potter and because of certain issues that and that he fired Mr. Potter and so that mediation should necessarily be attributable to him. Your honor will recall that this matter originated with Mr. ates with the criminal matter. Um he started out supervised visitation. We went through counselors. We came to court on I believe five different occasions for the court to expand his visitation with the children. Um and as a result he plead guilty those on the domestic assault.

[00:38:28]He completed a anger management. He did that. those charges faced on the agreement with my client were were uh expuned from his record and again it's a scenario where there is an alimony award in this case um obviously he has a significant higher earning capacity and your honor the underlying criminal contempt matter that that we've just arraigned him on um you will recall that Mr. Bates during the pendency of this case was supposed to deposit funds into the into the um account. He was supposed to account for all his business dealings. And lo and behold, we find out that Mr. Bates created a secret account, paid cash for a piece of property which he purchased in his own name. He testified that he expended exorbitant amount of funds to even to remodel and to build a home to do things on that property during the penalty. all without the court permission. Those were not disclosed in discovery. That was all testified to at the hearing. And again, it's just our request, your honor, that your honor, consider an award of attorney's fees on behalf of my client.

[00:39:42]I was handed today right before your honor took the bench a response that apparently was filed this morning. Um and again the the sum and substance of the recitation of of facts is uh Miss Anderson said it's correct that attorney's fees in divorce cases are considered as spousal support and con considered as an alimony award and again as she sets forth in her response the factors set forth the total amount of the attorney's fees and whether the attorney's fees are reasonable and and were they necessary. Again, your honor will recall uh we took up the better part. This case originated in 2022 and we took up virtually every time your honor was on the bench through from 22 through 25, this case was on your honor's docket and at each month that you were in Dixon County on on these issues. Um, and we would request that your honor allow me to submit my ter my affidavit of fees and extraordinary expenses and you consider an award.

[00:40:47]>> Miss Anderson, I had filed a response. I wasn't sure if you had a copy of it.

[00:40:54]>> I just looked at it in the file. I had not seen it until a moment ago.

[00:41:02]I filed this response requesting that the motion for attorney fees be dismissed.

[00:41:10]Uh I believe that the motion that's been filed is untimely.

[00:41:15]Um we had a trial where there's an order that said we were supposed to pursue attorney fees at trial. It's in an order signed by your honor. There was no evidence presented at the trial. Uh, Miss Bates had the opportunity to ask for attorney fees while we were here. As Miss Roberts had said, we were here for five days. I know they all weren't full days. A couple times people have gotten sick or whatever, but we were here for five days, and she never once brought that issue before the court. It's now been almost a year since uh the party's last hearing date. Um, I would direct your honor's attention to the order that you signed on September 15th.

[00:42:01]Uh, we had completed about 2 and 1/2 days of trial and we had settled the entire case uh with respect to alimony, property division, primary residential parent, everything was settled that you signed that on September 15th, 2025.

[00:42:22]Um and in that order you well we agreed we announced it in open court Mr. Bates um agreed that the mother, Miss Bates, was going to be the primary residential parent and the only issue that was left was the residential schedule like decision making, who was going to get tax deduction, things like that. And in that order, it says that each party reserves the right to request attorney fees at that time. We knew we were coming back on July 31, 2025 for the next hearing date. And we came back on that day, July 31, 2025. There was no evidence presented. We needed a few more hours of trial time. And we came back on August 15th, and we finished up the case that morning, and there was no evidence presented during that whole entire proceeding. So, I believe that this request for attorney fees now is untimely.

[00:43:26]They had the opportunity to present this during the trial and they sat on the rights and didn't do it. Uh, you've already signed an order dated September 15, 2025, telling the parties if they want attorney fees, bring it to your honor's attention on July 31, 2025, which they did not. It's been over a year uh since that was filed. And I know that, you know, it is in your discretion that you may award attorney fees.

[00:43:53]There's actually a statute on that. It's under 36-5-103.

[00:43:59]It talks about attorney fee awards that we they may be awarded that your honor has discretion. But if you look at section C of that, it talks about a prevailing party and a prevailing party um in a in a contempt issue and a and a an enforcement issue and al if you want to alter parenting time if you want to change custody. No, we had already determined that the mother's going to have custody. So, the issue that was left to be resolved on that last day and a half was just the father's parenting time and who gets the tax deduction and how much the child support was going to be. And um the issue of the primary residential parent wasn't even wasn't even on the table. Um so, I'm I'm just asking that this request for attorney fees be dismissed. Um because Mr. Bates should have an opportunity if you're going to o open this back up again to look through this that he can object to it. And and he also asked for his attorney fees. Um and I I would just point out that some of the issues that were left that last day and a half, he got what he asked for. He got a tax deduction for one of the children. He got expanded parenting time on the weekends. He got more time in the summer. The mother only wanted him to have one week in the summer. You gave him more time. So it he he had issues that were valid before the court and I think that the issue now to bring up is is completely inappropriate.

[00:45:29]On the other issue, the guardian at lightam fees you can look back in the court's file. The the guardian at lightam was appointed in March 2022 and there's just one sentence. It's uh paragraph seven. and it's numbered seven that Mickey Smith Esquire is appointed guardian at liidum for the party's minor children rule 48 wasn't followed that should have said how much it was going to cost it should have set her fee it should have told them how much they were going to be putting into the clerk's office and right before the final hearing you're supposed to let the parties know how much this is going to be so she did a great job and she was in the case for three years she sent us an affidavit in December and it was I I may be making this up. It seemed like it was several thousand dollar. So, as soon as we got it, I had my client pay half. I said, "Just go ahead and pay half." And we tried negotiating, you know, uh settlement on that. Um but now, Miss Bates doesn't want to pay her half. So, I I also believe this guardian of Edidum issue has a little bit of problems because the original order that appointed her did not talk about fees.

[00:46:43]that didn't follow the Supreme Court rule 48, which is supposed to advise the parties what their financial burdens are going to be. But to surprise them years later with this huge bill saying you owe now this guardian thousands of dollars, it's completely unfair now and unjust for Mr. Bates to have to pay this. He did go ahead and pay half of it. And I'm just asking if you look back at your file, the amount of assets that each of these parties were awarded, their their marital estate was well over a million dollars. Miss Bates got half of that.

[00:47:19]She has the ability to pay this money to the guardian at Leidum. And it would be extremely unfair now, 3 years, four years after her appointment to have Mr. Bates have to pay all of it. and we're asking that you just order they pay it in half and that you dismiss the attorney fees request now at this point.

[00:47:38]Thank you.

[00:47:51]>> provisions that he asked for. He was basically asking for a 50/50 residential schedule. your honor's hearing. Again, on the order that we entered on September 15th of 2025, it specifically reserved parties right to request attorney's fees. Um there was testimony as to that she had retained me on the case and the hourly rate. Um again, your honor took it under advisement. We did not know what was going to transpire from that. Your honor then made the fine in the order of September 5th.

[00:48:23]Your honor made the specific statement on page three of 11. Since the parties are unable to agree, this court is required to provide a parenting plan set forth. I mean, your honor found they were not able to agree on anything. um they stipulate the stipulation at the beginning that she was the primary residential parent um was done from the beginning but argue um but argued that he should have equal time based on the court's prior evidentary hearings and the testimony of the therapist Miss Pade and Miss Morton and the recommendation of the guardian adm's own observation of the party's demeanor and credibility the court finds that an equal residential schedule would not be in the children's best interest um so we were arguing over substantive matters, your honor. It's to come in and say, "Oh, we we stipulated one part of a parenting plan and therefore there was nothing to to litigate." Um, but the de the devil is in the details, as your honor knows, we litigated every aspect of that parenting plan. Um, the final decree he did, Mrs. Kelly Joe Bates is awarded an absolute divorce on the grounds of cruel and inhumane treatment, also known as inappropriate marital conduct.

[00:49:34]And again that was the request that was made. She was victorious in getting the divorce. She was victorious in getting named as the primary residential parent and had to defend vigorously um the schedule that the court finally adopted. Um so again your honor and as far as the attorneys as far as the guardian admies are concerned they were reasonable and necessary. Um I'm h I can provide the court a transcript if necessary about the appointment. It was my understanding at the time and and again I'm I'm I'm this I didn't pull that um because again I did not even though this motion for attorney's fees have been filed since December. I did not receive Miss Anderson's response until uh right before your honor took the bench um and on the appointment of the guardian adlidum. It was my understanding and again my thing is that Mr. Potter, his attorney at the time stipulated and agreed that would be appropriate. Um and so again I'll have to go back and review the transcript on that. So I don't have an independent recollection.

[00:50:45]I do recall during the pendency of this that they continue to file motions uh to expand his time.

[00:50:52]>> Basically, I understand Miss Anderson, but at the time that the guardian at Lightam was appointed, both sid both parties were in agreement with it. And um there was no objection made by Mr. Bass's lawyer at that time. In fact, I think both parties were more than willing to allow Miss Smith who has long served as a guardian ad light in these kinds of cases before this court and her fee schedule was known to all both Mr. Potter and Miss Roberts. So, this court is of the opinion that the guardian adiden's fees were reasonable and should be approved. However, I do find that they should be split equally between the parties and that Miss Bates should pay her half because that was the agreement that it was made at the time. It may not have been an agreement, but that's tacid in this court.

[00:51:35]>> Yes, your honor. And again, I would say your honor, that the evidence was clear at the court that Mr. Bates used the marital funds through his through the company Infinity Builders. And we produced checks at the hearing where I know at least one occasion he paid $25,000 to Mr. Potter using joint funds that my client did not have the benefit of. And then there was additional payments that were shown in the bank records that he paid Miss Anderson through business funds.

[00:52:05]And so again, it's a scenario where the entire lifestyle of Mr. Bates was funneled through and he was able to pay his attorney's fees as they went and he paid Mr. Potter and Miss Anderson through marital funds and that was through the business that he was supposed to be putting into the account.

[00:52:23]So Mr. Bates paid his attorneys >> and Well, I I understand you're objecting, but let's let Miss Roberts finish her argument, then I'll give you that opportunity. Um, it was brought up at trial. We submitted the the documents and I asked him particularly at trial. Um, if Miss Anderson doesn't recall that, but we did go through those documents. And >> my recollection was that there was an issue about Mr. Bates using the corporate or the business accounts to pay personal including uh some portion of his attorney's fees. Now, Miss Anderson, if you want to address what you were saying.

[00:53:25]This motion was brought under rule 54.

[00:53:28]Rule 54 has nothing to do with attorney fees. Um that can do discretionary cost guarding at lightem fees. This is a totally separate issue. This is under um 365101h if if you're going to uh look at an attorney fee award, you have to look at the factors enumerated. So you have to look at the total fees incurred by both parties uh in the case and you have to go through all these factors you know which which party has the ability to pay them whether they're reasonable. We have to have a trial over all of this. Um and I've never even seen the affidavit. So I don't even >> she hasn't submitted >> I know it it seems like if you would have filed it in December you would have sent us something but I haven't seen anything. So >> the if I understood, Miss Roberts, her motion is to be allowed to file an affidavit, which she has not yet done.

[00:54:22]So >> well, her I thought her motion said just she wants to be awarded attorney fees just like that under rule 54, which isn't the right rule. Um, so, you know, I I I also feel like this issue has already been put in the court's order.

[00:54:38]You already spoke to this. They were supposed to bring this to the final hearing. We signed it in September saying if you want to bring this issue of attorney fees, bring it up at the final hearing and they did not do that.

[00:54:50]We were here all day on July 15th and then we came back in August. They did not do that. They left the building and sat on that and then they waited until December and said, "Oh, we need our attorney fees." And they filed a motion under rule 54, never sent an affidavit for us to even look at. And here we are five or six months later for something that should have been done a year ago.

[00:55:11]And I'm I'm just asking that if you found that it's untimely and that they didn't file it during the hearing and that it needs to be dismissed.

[00:55:21]>> All right. Your motion to dismiss is currently is going to be overruled by the court to the extent that I'm going to allow both sides if you choose to submit your affidavit of attorneys fees.

[00:55:33]I will take this matter under advisement to be able because of the multi-day that I had to deal with this case in trial.

[00:55:42]It is not and it's been some time is not as fresh as what um I would like to be able to rule on this. I need to review the file and my notes. So we'll uh take it under advisement. Both sides have 30 days to file any affidavit of attorney's fees they wish to. I've already ruled on the guardian at all fee.

[00:56:11]What?

[00:56:23]>> That's good.

[00:56:31]Your honor, we filed this uh motion, this petition. It's a petition to establish paternity and to adopt a parenting plan and it is there urgency has created itself in this matter as the parties have two minor children. Um, and I believe the eldest is um will be six on the 22nd of this month as well as the youngest has the same date of birth and will be four um on the 22nd of this month. The parties were residents of Dixon County. Um they have had >> those children share the same day of birthday.

[00:57:10]>> They have had shared parenting of these children. The parties resided together for a number of years, a total of seven years. They split up in in couple of three years ago. I think 2023 they split up and they've had an equal residential schedule since that time. During that period of time, the mother has had some significant issues with drugs and different things that have gone on. Uh but the parties were working well together as far as sharing the children on basically a 50/50 residential schedule. um unbeknownst to my client on the day my Mrs. Mau the defendant in this case packed the children up and moved without notice without anything.

[00:57:53]So again it begs the question of the parental relocation statute because again the parental reloc relocation statute you can interpret it a number of different ways. Um there's not been a finding of they my client never went forward and established fraternity and the party's never married but he is listed on the birth certificate and he was spending in intervals of time with the children and basically had an equal residential schedule and Mrs. Mau just packed up and moved um with her now paramore to Illinois with the children.

[00:58:25]Um, and it what has happened is is that my client actually came in prior to the move and and was thinking about filing this and then it became an e situation when she packed up and moved. Um, my client did go up and had arranged with her to visit with the children. He went up and picked up the children and lo and behold, she got served a couple of hours after he picked up the children and he she called and threatened to have him arrested for kidnapping if he did not bring the children back immediately. So, we're here ready to go forward on a temporary adoption of a parenting plan. I do not think I will have Miss Mal address it. I do not think fraternity. She said the discovery requests were too invasive, but the judge shut that argument down during a heated custody battle packed with accusations, financial disputes, and courtroom tension. The hearing exploded after a mother objected to turning over unredacted bank records, Venmo transactions, and other personal financial information during an ongoing parenting case. The judge explained that when parents fight over custody and child support, the court has the right to examine whether someone is hiding income or living beyond what they claim in court. Things got especially tense when the mother argued that requests for photographs of her home felt very invasive and intrusive, but the judge fired back with a blunt reality check.

[00:59:51]That is correct. Then came the strongest moment of the hearing. The judge explained that once parents bring a custody fight into court, private life stops being completely private because judges must know what kind of environment a child is actually living in. He warned that if she refused to provide information about the home, the other side could argue she was hiding an inappropriate environment from the court. The courtroom stayed tense as the judge ordered unredacted financial records to be turned over under a protective order while repeatedly reminding both sides that family court is not trial by ambush. Do you think courts should have access to this much personal information in custody cases?