In Re: The Marriage of Noelle Christine Green and Prentiss Lamont Green Noelle Christine Green v. Prentiss Lamont Green

Opinion

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

FILED establishing the defense of res judicata, collateral estoppel, or the law of the case. Apr 23 2012, 9:30 am

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: CLERK of the supreme court, court of appeals and

MATTHEW G. GRANTHAM tax court

Bowers, Brewer, Garrett & Wiley, LLP Huntington, Indiana

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF NOELLE ) CHRISTINE GREEN and PRENTISS ) LAMONT GREEN, ) ) NOELLE CHRISTINE GREEN, ) ) Appellant-Petitioner, ) ) v. ) No. 49A02-1110-DR-932 ) PRENTISS LAMONT GREEN, ) ) Appellee-Respondent. )

APPEAL FROM THE MARION SUPERIOR COURT The Honorable Robin L. Moberly, Judge The Honorable Kimberly D. Mattingly, Magistrate Cause No. 49D05-0703-DR-11176

April 23, 2012

MEMORANDUM DECISION - NOT FOR PUBLICATION

MAY, Judge Noelle Green (Mother) appeals the magistrate’s entry regarding child support

modification. We dismiss.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Mother and Prentiss Green (Father) divorced on July 9, 2008. On June 3, 2011, Father

filed a petition for modification of child support. The magistrate held a hearing on

September 9, and on September 12, entered into the minutes of court: “After taking this

matter [under advisement], comes now the Court and modifies support to $25 per week for

the period of [Father’s] unemployment, 4/27/11 to 8/12/11. Thereafter, support shall be $115

per week.” (App. at 8.)

DISCUSSION AND DECISION

Mother appeals the magistrate’s recommendation to modify Father’s child support

payment effective April 27, 2011.1 As the magistrate’s recommendation to which Mother

objects is “a nullity from which no appeal can be taken[,]” Breaziel v. State, 568 N.E.2d

1072, 1073 (Ind. Ct. App. 1991), we are unable to address her appeal. See also Ind. Code §

33-23-5-9(a) (providing that in civil trials, “a magistrate shall report findings in an

evidentiary hearing, a trial or a jury’s verdict to the court. The court shall enter the final

order.”). Accordingly, we dismiss.

Dismissed.

FRIEDLANDER, J., and BARNES, J., concur.

1 We acknowledge Judge Moberly signed a final order dated September 16, 2011, and that final order did not include the language about which Mother complains. Mother explicitly states in her brief she is not appealing the terms of that September 16 final order. 2