Fairfield v. Fairfield

• Decision Date: 31 May 1989
• Docket Number: No. 49S00-8808-CV-721,49S00-8808-CV-721
• Citation: 538 N.E.2d 948
• Court: Indiana Supreme Court
• Parties: Patricia E. FAIRFIELD, Appellant, v. Billy D. FAIRFIELD, The Honorable Ronald E. Drury, as Judge of the Boone Circuit Court, and Boone Circuit Court, Appellees.

Page 948

538 N.E.2d 948

Patricia E. FAIRFIELD, Appellant, v. Billy D. FAIRFIELD, The Honorable Ronald E. Drury, as Judge of the Boone Circuit Court, and Boone Circuit Court, Appellees.

No. 49S00-8808-CV-721.

Supreme Court of Indiana.

May 31, 1989.

Rehearing Denied Aug. 11, 1989.

Sherwood Blue, Indianapolis, for appellant.

Ronald L. Lehrman, Lebanon, for Billy D. Fairfield.

Linley E. Pearson, Atty. Gen., Arthur Thaddeus Perry, Deputy Atty. Gen., Indianapolis, for The Honorable Ronald E. Drury and Boone Circuit Court.

GIVAN, Justice.

An action for dissolution of marriage from her husband Billy Fairfield was initiated by Patricia Fairfield in the Boone Circuit Court. A final hearing in the dissolution proceeding was commenced on May 17, 1985 and completed on May 24, 1985 before Judge Drury. A decree for the dissolution of marriage was entered on June 19, 1985.

Patricia filed an independent action for relief from judgment pursuant to Ind.R.Tr.Pr. 60(B). Judge Drury, the Boone Circuit Court and Billy were served with summons. Judge O'Neill of the Clinton Circuit Court was appointed as special judge. Counsel for Judge Drury and the Boone Circuit Court filed a motion to dismiss, which was granted. Patricia filed an amended complaint and a motion for change of venue, which was granted, and the cause was venued to the Marion Circuit Court. A motion to dismiss the amended complaint was filed. The trial court granted the dismissal with prejudice on April 14, 1988. She now argues that certain post-decree proceedings were presided over by a judge pro tempore, J. Jeffery Edens, and that all actions taken by the judge pro tempore are void because he was never appointed, was not legally qualified, and acted as a judge pro tempore while Judge Drury was present and presiding. Therefore, she concludes that a judge pro tempore had no jurisdiction over the proceedings and any actions taken by him are void.

A judge pro tempore is appointed to act during the absence of the regular judge and exercises all of the powers of the regular judge during that period. State ex rel. Reed v. Marion Sup. Crt., Civil Division, Room No. 3, et al (1982), Ind., 438 N.E.2d 260. However, in the case before us, the only statement in the record concerning the judge pro tempore are those made in appellant's amended motion for relief from judgment. We find nothing in this record demonstrates that Judge Drury was in fact acting as regular judge of the Boone Circuit Court at the time a pro tempore was serving on appellant's case.

In State ex rel. Peacock v. Marion Superior Ct. (1986), Ind., 490 N.E.2d 1094, this Court stated:

"In the absence of any showing to the contrary, we must presume the action of the respondent judge to have been correct. We therefore hold there is nothing in this record to indicate that the regular judge attempted to act simultaneously with a previously appointed judge pro tempore." Id. at 1096.

Appellant also attempts to raise several other questions which have this same infirmity. She argues that the dissolution decree is void and the trial court acted without jurisdiction because the pronouncement of the dissolution was oral and not written.

She argues the Boone Circuit Court erroneously ordered the dissolution to become effective retroactively. She contends her ...