Preview:

Pursuant to Ind.Appellate Rule 65(D), this Memorandum Decision shall not be regarded as precedent or cited before any court except for the purpose of establishing the defense of res judicata, collateral estoppel, or the law of the case. ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: PAUL J. PACIOR Noblesville, Indiana ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE: JAMES R. TOOMBS Noblesville, Indiana

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
IN RE THE MATTER OF J.A.R. KAREN REYNOLDS, Appellant, vs. KIMBERLY and RAJ LOHANI, Appellee. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

No. 29A02-0706-CV-505

APPEAL FROM THE HAMILTON SUPERIOR COURT The Honorable Steven R. Nation, Judge Cause No. 29D01-0605-AD-762

December 20, 2007 MEMORANDUM DECISION - NOT FOR PUBLICATION

SHARPNACK, Judge

Karen Reynolds appeals the trial court's grant of an adoption petition filed by Kimberly and Raj Lohani (the "Lohanis") regarding Reynolds's son, J.A.R. Reynolds raises one issue, which we restate as whether the trial court's order granting the Lohanis' adoption petition is clearly erroneous. We affirm. 1 The relevant facts follow. J.A.R. was born to Reynolds on August 25, 2001, in Georgia. Reynolds also has an older child, who was raised by Reynolds's mother, Juanita Wiggs. Following J.A.R.'s birth, he lived with Wiggs in Atlanta, Georgia. Kimberly Lohani is Reynolds's sister. Because Reynolds could not care for J.A.R., the Lohanis began caring for J.A.R. in October 2001. The arrangement between Kimberly and Reynolds was that Kimberly would act as J.A.R.'s mother and Reynolds would act as his aunt. The Lohanis originally lived in New Jersey but moved to Indiana in May 2002. J.A.R. occasionally visited Wiggs and Reynolds in Atlanta. However, Reynolds never provided any financial support to the Lohanis for J.A.R.'s care. J.A.R. has been

diagnosed with attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder, and the Lohanis have arranged a significant amount of therapy and treatment for J.A.R. In late-2004, Reynolds was angry, came to Indiana, and took J.A.R. from the Lohanis. However, she soon returned J.A.R. to the Lohanis because "[s]he couldn't

We direct Reynolds's attention to Ind. Appellate Rule 46(A)(10), which requires an appellant's brief to "include any written opinion, memorandum of decision or findings of fact and conclusions thereon relating to the issues raised on appeal."

1

2

handle him." Transcript at 28. At that time, Reynolds consented to the Lohanis having guardianship. A guardianship was established in December 2005. In December 2005, at a family Christmas gathering in Atlanta, Reynolds became extremely angry that J.A.R. did not want to spend the night with her and, ultimately, the police were called to remove her from the house. In January 2006, Reynolds filed a petition to terminate the guardianship. After a hearing, the trial court denied Reynolds's petition to terminate the guardianship. Reynolds then filed a petition for visitation. In a separate cause, the Lohanis filed a petition to adopt J.A.R. in May 2006. The Lohanis alleged that Reynolds's consent was not required pursuant to Ind. Code

Download In Re the Matter of J.A.R.; Karen Reynolds v. Kimberly & Raj Lohani.pdf

Indiana Law