J.M. v. D.A.

While I concur with the majority's conclusion that the trial court's order denying Father's petition to modify his child support obligation was not clearly erroneous, I respectfully dissent from its conclusion that the trial court abused its discretion in finding Father in contempt.

This court has previously concluded that it is for the trial court to weigh the evidence and determine whether Father's noncompliance with the court's child support order was willful. See Holman v. Holman, 472 N.E.2d4 1279, 1284 (Ind.Ct.App.1985) (providing that it is for the trial court to weigh the evidence and…