FILED
July 7, 2020
CLERK OF THE HAMILTON
CIRCUIT COURT
STATE OF INDIANA
IN
VVV
1
SS:
COUNTY 0F HAMILTON
IN
HAMILTON SUPERIOR COURT
CAUSE N0.
29D01-1 201-DR-000797
RE THE MARRIAGE OF
TINA TRAVIS-HEGYI,
Pefifionen
and
VVVVVVVV
BOBBY HEGYI,
Respondent.
ORDER FROM JUNE 25,
MATTER came
THIS
2020 HEARING
before the Court on June 25,
2020 on the
Verified
ln-Camera Interview
Emergency
Petition for Modification of
on June
2020, by Tina Travis-Hegyi (“Mother”). The Court finds and rules as follows:
15,
1.
Custody and Motion
for
Mother and Bobby Hegyi (“Father”) share one minor
Hegyi (DOB: 06/01/2007) (“the
The order of the Court
in
child,
filed
namely, Isabella
Child”).
place at the time of the June 25, 2020 hearing
named
Father as the custodial parent of the Child.
.
Upon
the
Court’s
review of Mother’s
Emergency
Modification of Custody (“ER Modification Petition”)
Verified
Motion for a
and Mother’s Motion
for
an
In-Camera interview of the Child (“In-Camera Motion”), the Court entered on
Order on June
16,
2020
Mother’s
setting
ER
Modification
videoconference hearing on June 25, 2020. As set
Petition
forth in the Court’s
for
June
16,
2020 Order Setting Videoconference Hearing, the Court advised, “Due
the
COVID-19 Emergency, and pursuant to
issued by the Indiana
Supreme Court
Administrative Rule 17, the Court
Page
now
1
a
to
the authority granted under Orders
granting
emergency
relief
pursuant to
sets his matter for hearing on the 25th
of 9
day
2020
of June,
Videoconference Hearing. Hearing
Emergency
Camera
be conducted as a Microsoft Teams
at 10:00 a.m. to
be conducted on the record regarding
will
Custody and Motion
Verified Petition for Modification of
Interview ofthe Child, filed
June
15, 2020. In
an
for
In-
person appearances are
not permitted.”
.
The June
16,
2020 Order provided other
to the fact that the
to
.
instructions, including but not limited
Court would issue an email
invitation for the
Videoconference
each email address provided by counsel and/or seIf-represented
that the invitation
must be accepted, and
Court 48 hours
advance
The Court
in
that
all
exhibits
must be
filed
litigants,
with the
of the hearing.
additionally granted Mother’s
on June 25, 2020 immediately
In-Camera Motion and set the same
prior to the hearing
on the
ER
Modification
Petition.
.
Mother hired a process server
ER
to
serve Father
in
Tennessee
Modification Petition, Motion for In—Camera Interview,
hearing on June 25, 2020 (“Order”), but
filed
with the subject
and Order for
virtual
a Motion for Order for Service by
an Alternative Method under Rule 4.14 (B) of the Indiana Rules of
Procedure when Father’s locked gates/fences at
his
Trial
home prevented
personal service.
.
The Court noted
that
its
updated Appearance
in
throughout the
December
10,
2018 Order required Father
to
file
order to take control 0f Father’s allegations
litigation that
he did not receive communications from the
Page 2
of 9
an
former PC, Mother, or the Court. However, the
moved and had
that Father
The Court
staff via
also required
in
to the
Court
service address
showed
not updated his physical address.
December 2018
email to confirm receipt of
responded
new
December 2018 Orders. Father
its
staff with the
that Father respond to the Court’s
email of bob.heqvi@sbcqlobal.com, but
provided the Court with a different email via his Appearance
(bob.he
|ive.com).
i
The Court granted Mother’s Motion
Alternative
Method on June
for
Order Authorizing Service by an
22, 2020, specifically via Father’s email that he
uses routinely bob.heqvi@sbcqlobal.net.
10.
Mother served Father on June 22, 2020
method approved by the Court’s June
at 11:13 p.m. through the alternative
22,
2020 Order
(bob.heqvi@sbcqlobal.net), and Mother notified the Court of the same.
11. Father received the invitation for the
from the Court
staff
on June 23, 2020
June
25,
2020 Videoconference hearing
at 1:02 p.m.
on the same email address
as the service address (bob.heqvi@sbcq|oba|.net). Father then sent an email
to the
Court on June 24, 2020 at 2:31 p.m. via bob.heqvi@sbcqlobal.net
requesting that the hearing be continued. Although no pleading
was
filed
with
the Court, Mother’s counsel had received a copy of this electronic
communication from Father’s routine email of bob.heqvi@sbcqlobal.net and
filed
12.The
an objection
Court
to
a continuance on various grounds.
conducted
Videoconference for the
the
ER
In-Camera
interview,
which
delayed
the
Modification Petition. Mother timely appeared
Page 3
of 9
in
Teams videoconference on June
person and by counsel via Microsoft
25, 2020.
Father did not contact the Court for the videoconference hearing at the planned
1O a.m.
when
However, Father answered the phone
start time or during the delay.
the Court contacted him to determine his whereabouts for the hearing,
and Father indicated
that
he was waiting
Father then participated
for the call.
throughout the hearing via telephone.
13.Father
made an
videoconference.
oral
motion
continuance
for
The Court found
that Father
the
at
outset
the
of
had been served pursuant
to
the Alternative Method and that Father had actual notice of the hearing.
Father’s emails with the Court for the continuance request and additional ex
parte
communications
that
were
disclosed
Court
the
by
the
via
bob.heqvi@sbcqlobal.net address gave further support that Father received
the pleadings and had actual notice of the pleading.
Court that he ignores the email account that he
listed in his
service through Odyssey. (bob.hegyi@|ive.com).
Father
is
Appearance
The Court advised
for
that
responsible for staying abreast of this case, keeping his Appearance
form updated as required by
LR29-TR03-201
litigant.
Father also advised the
.30
and
Trial
Rule 3.1
this Court’s
(E),
Hamilton County Local Rule
Order of December
10,
2018 as a pro se
This Court has had to go to great lengths to get service of motions and
orders on Father
in
the past, as outlined
Father does not check his email account
address without informing the Court
to
the Order of
listed in his
December
10, 2018.
Appearance or moves
an address, Father assumes the
not knowing he has been served as a
Page 4
in
of 9
litigant
through the Odyssey
If
his
risk of
efiling
notification
the
system. From
efiling notification
onward, Father shall only be served through
this point
system.
14.The witnesses were sworn, which were Mother, Father, and the parenting
was taken through
coordinator (“PC”), and evidence
Modification Petition that requested Mother be
and
legal custodian of the Child
and contact with the
advance
of the
that Father
No
Child.
exhibits
their
named as
testimony on the
ER
the sole physical and
have supervised parenting time
were submitted by
either party
June 25, 2020 hearing, and neither party attempted
to
in
submit
evidence through exhibits.
15.The Court had held the In-Camera Interview with the Child on June 25, 2020.
As provided by
|.C.
31-1 7-4-1
(b),
the Court
may interview the
to assist the court in determining the child's perception of
child in
chambers
whether parenting
time by a parent might endanger the child's physical health or significantly
impair the child's emotional development.
16.The Court finds pursuant
to
|.C.
31-17- 4—1 and
|.C.
31—17-4-2 from the
evidence submitted after conducting the June 25 videoconference hearing and
after conducting the
In-Camera interview with the Child that the Father’s routine
actions have caused and
will
continue to cause significant impairment to the
Child's emotional development.
in IC.
31-17-2—8 since
The Court
this Court’s last
finds
changes
custody order;
in
the factors set out
specifically, Factors (3)
the wishes of the child, (4) interaction and interrelationship of the child with the
Child’s Father
and
(5)
the child’s adjustment to the child’s Father’s home.
Page 5
of 9
The
Court finds from that the Child
is
afraid of Father to the point of terror
and
that
Father’s parenting time shall be restricted.
17.The Court also finds that Father has acted
unilaterally
on
legal
custody issues
including, but not limited to, the selection of a parochial school for the Child,
proceeding with significant medical treatment, and refusal to provide an
insurance card.
18.Mother
is
named as
the temporary sole physical and legal custodian of the
and pending a
Child, effective immediately,
19.
Mother
is
order
final
required to provide insurance for the Child.
20.A|| of Father’s parenting time
and contact with the Child
a professional supervisor at Father’s cost, and
place
in
Indiana
in
all
the Indianapolis area pending a
shall
be supervised by
parenting time shall take
final order.
21 Neutral Ground Solutions shall be the agency to provide the supervision, unless
.
the parties reach an agreement through the Parenting Coordinator for another
professional supervisor.
22.A|| telephonic
suspended as
and video communications between the Child and Father are
part of this temporary order.
As such,
Father’s pleadings filed
on June 29, July 2 and July 6 regarding video contact with the Child are moot
and any requested
relief is
hereby denied. This
is
done
for the
Court to receive
appropriate professional guidance through counselors and therapists at the
final
hearing as to the best
communicate without causing
way
for the child
further emotional
23. Mother shall immediately enroll the Child
Page 6
of 9
in
and Father
harm and fear
counseling.
to interact
in
the child.
and
24.Mother
shall enroll the Child at Fall
Creek Middle School
school year, and Father shall remove the Child’s
the school the Child previously attended
for the
name from
the enrollment of
Tennessee. Mother
in
2020-2021
shall
cover
all
costs related to enrolling the child at Fall Creek Middle School, including book
rental, subject to
proper apportionment at the
25.Mother’s child support obligation
Mother’s employer
withholding order.
is
via
hearing on custody.
terminated effective June 25, 2020, and
ordered to terminate payments through the income
Any funds
income withholding order
2020
is
final
received by Father after June 25, 2020 due to the
shall
be returned by Father
The
check through Mother’s counsel.
final
to
Mother by July 30,
hearing and order shall
include calculations for Father’s child support obligation that shall be retroactive
to
June 25, 2020.
26.The Hamilton Count Guardian Ad Litem Program (“Program”)
appoint a Guardian ad Litem (“GAL”) to assist the Court
on the
ER
was approximately
6, noting that
“unbiased and independent
initial
GAL
final
orders
[of]
he
GAL
is
appointed
in
2013 when the
looking for an investigation that
outside influence.”
He
is
further notes that the
“would require only minimal updates” on the situation.
28.Mother objects
to the
potential for the
reflected a close
and
making
ordered to
Modification Petition.
27.Father requests the reappointment of the
Child
in
is
initial
reappointment of the
GAL
initial
GAL
to
guard against the
to “defend” her conclusion that Father’s acts
committed father-daughter relationship rather than coaching
alienation.
Page 7
of 9
29.The Court finds
wi||
involve
that there
Upon
a need for an objective fresh look at the family that
more than a “minimal update.” The Court
new GAL
Director to appoint a
30.
is
Program
to this matter.
GAL
the appointment of the specific
of the timeframe for the
instructs the
GAL’s Report, the
timeframe and the Court shall set a
matter and the determination
in this
such
parties shall advise the Court of
hearing commensurate with that
final
timeframe.
31 .The Court instructs Father that he
is
required to
through the Odyssey system and that he must serve
counsel through that
Odyssey
user
and
same
system.
add
himself
pleadings electronically
file all
all
pleading on Mother’s
As such, Father must
as
a
contact
service
register
as an
this
case
in
(httpszllefile.incourts.qov/OFSweb#). With this e-filing registration, U.S. Mail
is
no longer used and cannot be required of any opposing party as Father
attempts to
32. Father
is
demand
in his
Appearance.
prohibited from emailing the Court or the Magistrate’s staff directly to
discuss disputes between the parties
in this
case.
emails directly from Father since June 25, 2020.
The Court has received
Two
four
of those emails did not
include the opposing party, requiring the Court to advise attorney Judy Hester
ofthe communication by Father
in
order to avoid ex parte communication.
emergency develops or exists not anticipated by
shall
file
to either set
The Parenting Coordinator
Page 8
filing
system.
a telephonic conference or set for
exists
of 9
an
Emergency Order, Father
an appropriate emergency order through the electronic
The Court can then reach out
hearing.
this
If
and was appointed
to
resolve
disputes between the parties without resulting to Court intervention.
has seen no evidence of bias on behalf of the
The
parties shall continue to
with this Order
ALL OF WHICH
and
IS
PC
despite Father’s allegations.
work their disputes through the
this Court’s prior
SO ORDERED
orders
this July 6,
in this
Distribution:
Judy G. Hester, Esq.
Bobby Hegyi, pro se
Attorney Angela Swenson
Parenting Coordinator
Hamilton County Guardian Ad Litem Program
c/o Director Shelley Hiles Haymaker
Page 9
of 9
PC
in
conformance
case.
2020.
Darren
J.
The Court
Murphy, Magistrate