Professional Documents
Culture Documents
In the Iowa District Court in and for SAC County Case No: 02811 CDDM001353 Title: JUDITH L NEVILLE VS DAVID GENE NEVILLE
Because your case has been converted to an electronic case, it is now governed by Chapter 16 Rules Pertaining to the Use of the Electronic Document Management System.
What is required of you? You must register to use the Electronic Document Management System (EDMS).
If you haven't already registered, please log on to the Iowa Judicial Branch eFiling website at https://www.iowacourts.state.ia.us/EFile to register.
You are required to have a current e-mail account for use with EDMS. Registration requires you to understand and agree to comply with the rules that govern electronic filing, contained the Chapter 16 Rules Pertaining to the use of the Electronic Document Management System, available on the Iowa Judicial Branch eFiling website. Your registration constitutes your request for, and consent to, electronic service of court-generated documents and documents filed electronically by other parties. When you have completed your registration, you can begin filing and viewing documents on your case and receiving notifications of filings, and events. EXCEPTIONS: For good cause, the court may authorize you to submit a document in paper. Upon showing of exceptional circumstances, the chief judge of the district in which a case is pending may grant you an exemption from registering and filing electronically.
Division VI of Chapter 16 Rules Pertaining to the Use of the Electronic Document Management System specifies personal information that is now considered protected by the court, as well as what you must do to keep protected personal information out of the public documents you eFile.
Technical support for the Iowa Judicial Branch eFiling website is available at 1-877-369-8324. If you have questions about court procedures related to electronic filing, contact your county clerk of court office.
We look forward to your comments and suggestions as we implement electronic filings in the Iowa Courts
In The Iowa District Court for the Second Judicial District In re the conversion of paper files to electric documents Administrative Order
Iowa Court Rule 16.102 authorizes a chief judge to order the conversion of paper court files to an electronic file of any case not subject to the Rules Pertaining to the Use of the Electronic Document Management System (EDMS). It is in the best interest of all for the Court to have access via EDMS to pending files that exist at the time a county clerk of court office implements EDMS. Accordingly: It is so Ordered that: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Each Clerk of Court may take action to convert paper case files that are pending and will likely appear on a future court schedule as soon as implementation of EDMS begins in their respective counties. The Clerk shall work with the local Court to identify specific documents that are to be scanned in each case type. Upon implementation of electronic filing in the County, the security level of these electronic records shall be as identified by the EDMS Business Advisory Committee. The Clerk shall send the Notice Regarding Electronic Filing to the attorneys and parties appearing pro se. Once notified, counsel of record or parties appearing pro se shall apply the rules pertaining to protection of personal privacy (Iowa Ct.R.16.602 through 16.607) to all future filings in that case. After being notified of commencement of the electronic filing in that County, attorneys, parties appearing pro se and all other shall file all future filings on that case electronically.
It is so Ordered: Dated 3rd day of November, 2010 /s/ Kurt L. Wilke Kurt L. Wilke, Chief Judge of the Second Judicial District of Iowa
Recipient List Case ID : 02811 CDDM001353 - JUDITH L NEVILLE VS DAVID GENE NEVILLE E-FILED 2013 MAR 15 10:09 AM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT Event Cd : NOOT CHARLES ADAM SCHULTE filed
In the Iowa District Court in and for SAC County Case No: 02811 CDDM001353 Title: JUDITH L NEVILLE VS DAVID GENE NEVILLE
Because your case has been converted to an electronic case, it is now governed by Chapter 16 Rules Pertaining to the Use of the Electronic Document Management System.
What is required of you? You must register to use the Electronic Document Management System (EDMS).
If you haven't already registered, please log on to the Iowa Judicial Branch eFiling website at https://www.iowacourts.state.ia.us/EFile to register.
You are required to have a current e-mail account for use with EDMS. Registration requires you to understand and agree to comply with the rules that govern electronic filing, contained the Chapter 16 Rules Pertaining to the use of the Electronic Document Management System, available on the Iowa Judicial Branch eFiling website. Your registration constitutes your request for, and consent to, electronic service of court-generated documents and documents filed electronically by other parties. When you have completed your registration, you can begin filing and viewing documents on your case and receiving notifications of filings, and events. EXCEPTIONS: For good cause, the court may authorize you to submit a document in paper. Upon showing of exceptional circumstances, the chief judge of the district in which a case is pending may grant you an exemption from registering and filing electronically.
Division VI of Chapter 16 Rules Pertaining to the Use of the Electronic Document Management System specifies personal information that is now considered protected by the court, as well as what you must do to keep protected personal information out of the public documents you eFile.
Technical support for the Iowa Judicial Branch eFiling website is available at 1-877-369-8324. If you have questions about court procedures related to electronic filing, contact your county clerk of court office.
We look forward to your comments and suggestions as we implement electronic filings in the Iowa Courts
In The Iowa District Court for the Second Judicial District In re the conversion of paper files to electric documents Administrative Order
Iowa Court Rule 16.102 authorizes a chief judge to order the conversion of paper court files to an electronic file of any case not subject to the Rules Pertaining to the Use of the Electronic Document Management System (EDMS). It is in the best interest of all for the Court to have access via EDMS to pending files that exist at the time a county clerk of court office implements EDMS. Accordingly: It is so Ordered that: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Each Clerk of Court may take action to convert paper case files that are pending and will likely appear on a future court schedule as soon as implementation of EDMS begins in their respective counties. The Clerk shall work with the local Court to identify specific documents that are to be scanned in each case type. Upon implementation of electronic filing in the County, the security level of these electronic records shall be as identified by the EDMS Business Advisory Committee. The Clerk shall send the Notice Regarding Electronic Filing to the attorneys and parties appearing pro se. Once notified, counsel of record or parties appearing pro se shall apply the rules pertaining to protection of personal privacy (Iowa Ct.R.16.602 through 16.607) to all future filings in that case. After being notified of commencement of the electronic filing in that County, attorneys, parties appearing pro se and all other shall file all future filings on that case electronically.
It is so Ordered: Dated 3rd day of November, 2010 /s/ Kurt L. Wilke Kurt L. Wilke, Chief Judge of the Second Judicial District of Iowa
Recipient List Case ID : 02811 CDDM001353 - JUDITH L NEVILLE VS DAVID GENE NEVILLE E-FILED 2013 MAR 15 10:09 AM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT Event Cd : NOOT CHARLES ADAM SCHULTE filed
IN THE IOWA DISTRICT COURT FOR SAC COUNTY In Re the Marriage of Judith Lu i!!e Ne"i!!e and Da"id #ene Ne"i!!e Upon the Petition of JUDITH LUCILLE NEVILLE, Petitioner, And concerning DAVID GENE NEVILLE, Respondent. ORDER FOR RECORDS CDD!"#$%$
This &'tter is (efore the Co)rt on Respondent*s App+ic'tion for Co)rt ,rdered -)(poen'. The App+ic'tion recites th't C'tho+ic Ch'rities .i++ not prod)ce the s)(poen'ed records .itho)t ' co)rt order. The proposed -)(poen' inc+)des s)fficient +'ng)'ge to protect the pri/'c0 of the p'rties 'nd chi+dren in/o+/ed in this &'tter, 'nd to protect the interests of C'tho+ic Ch'rities. Th't +'ng)'ge is incorpor'ted herein 's ' Protecti/e ,rder 'nd the re1)ested -)(poen' is 'ppro/ed. IT I- ,RDERED th't the proposed -)(poen' is 'ppro/ed 'nd C'tho+ic Ch'rities is ordered to prod)ce the records descri(ed in the -)(poen' on the ter&s pro/ided in the -)(poen', either in 'd/'nce to the 'ttorne0 re1)esting the records, .ith ' cop0 to (e pro/ided to the other 'ttorne0, or 't tri'+ (0 person'+ 'ppe'r'nce of 'n ')thori2ed represent'ti/e of C'tho+ic Ch'rities.
State of Iowa Courts Type: Case Number CDDM001353 OTHER ORDER Case Title JUDITH L NEVILLE VS DAVID GENE NEVILLE So Ordered
page 2 of 2
2RDM02 IN THE IOWA DISTRICT COURT FOR SAC COUNTY IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF JUDITH LUCILLE NEVILLE AND DAVID GENE NEVILLE UPON THE PETITION OF Case No. 02811 CDDM001353 JUDITH LUCILLE NEVILLE , PETITIONER, AND CONCERNING DAVID GENE NEVILLE , RESPONDENT. COURT REPORTER MEMORANDUM AND CERTIFICATE
COURT REPORTER MEMORANDUM (The court reporter shall file this memorandum with the district court clerk.) Appearances: For Plaintiff/Petitioner: Charles Schulte For Defendant/Respondent: James Van Dyke Other: Information required by Iowa Rule of Civil Procedure 1.903(3): I, Jackie Thompson Schaffner, am providing the following information as required by Iowa Rule of Civil Procedure 1.903(3): 1. The type of proceeding that was reported: Modification 2. The date(s) on which the proceeding occurred: 03/28/2013 3. The name of the court reporter who reported the proceeding: Jackie Thompson Schaffner 4. The name of the judge who presided over the proceeding: Joel Swanson 5. The reporting fee for the proceeding: $40.00 6. We, the undersigned judge before whom the above-entitled case was tried, and the official court reporter who, by order of the Court, reported the same, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing is the report of the whole proceedings upon the trial and/or hearing of the above-entitled cause made and taken pursuant to the order and direction of the Court, in accordance with Iowa Code Section 624.10. /s/Jackie Thompson Schaffner
1 of 3
2 of 3
State of Iowa Courts Case Number CDDM001353 Type: Case Title JUDITH L NEVILLE VS DAVID GENE NEVILLE COURT REPORTER MEMORANDUM AND CERTIFICATE So Ordered
3 of 3
The following exhibits were offered and admitted by the Court at the hearing as shown above: Petitioner Exhibit 2 - Memo from P. Curran Exhibit 3 - Memo from P. Curran Exhibit 4 - School research
1 of 2
State of Iowa Courts Case Number CDDM001353 Type: Case Title JUDITH L NEVILLE VS DAVID GENE NEVILLE EXHIBIT LIST So Ordered
2 of 2
TO:WHOM lTMAY CONCERN FROM: Patricia M. Curran, L|SW RE:Judy Neville 03/25/20L3
I ama psychotherapist at Catholic Charities Center for Life Counseling, a branch office of catholic charities Diocese of Des Moines. I have a client bythe name of Judy Neville, whohas beenseeing me since 05/07 Catelynn /2072with herdaughters andJennifer Neville. Ms.Neville andherdaughters havebeennavigating through difficult motheranddaughter relationship issues. Judy hasshown herself to be patient andkindwithcatelynn andJennifer. She allows herself to letthemsay anything within my presence without interruption or reactivity. sheoffersheropinions to them,andpresents these opinions withouttalking downto themor criticizing them.She hasproven herself to be calm and thoughtfu l. I have observed no mental lllness or personality disorders in Judy's actions or thoughts. she wants herchildren to be happy andto do well.sheiswilling to lookat herself in order to help themachieve adulthood safely andsuccessfully.
TO: Whomlt MayConcern FROM: Patricia m. Curran, LISW RE:Catelyn n Nevllle 03/2s/20L3
Catelynn Neville is a clientof mine. Shehasbeenattending session s since 05/07 /2012.I determined that shewassuffering from Posttraumatic (PTSD). Stress Disorder Sheinitially came for three sessions andthenshetooka break for a time.This isa typical response for someone withPTSD to come for a while andthentheytakea break fromtherapy. She came back again andreports that shefeelsbetterandless triggered by thoughts of the traumatic event.other thansleeping with her bedroom lights on andfeeling afraid whenshesees the perpetrator of herabuse, sheis far less triggered. when I lastsawher,I decided that sheneednot returnon a regular basis. Sheis always welcome to comeback if the symptoms returnor for anvother reason. sheis doingverywell in school andwith herfamily.sheis less reactive to acting out andcriticisms fromherfriends. lt is hard to imagine thatshewillbe anything otherthana huge success in life.
x'1)
d)'\
District Name
Numerator
4 Year Denominator
Denison
Denver DesMoines Independent Diagonal Dike-NewHartford Dows Dubuque Dunkerton Boyer Valley Durant Eagle Grove Earlham EastBuchanan East Central EastGreene East Marshall East Union Eastern Allamakee River Valley Edgewood-Colesburg Eldora-New Providence Elk Horn-Kimballton
1J4 | I
r59
l
) n
t | 1.s22 I
o
t-^
IJ
1,923 6 52 I 840
52 I
100.00
29 27
4t)
30 29
46
55 5l
32 I t4 53 28 29 34
33
I
l4 5'7 29 30 35 56
62 35
70 35
100.00
http://www.educateiowa.gov/index.php?option=com_docman&task=cat view&gid=530&rtemid=55 Source: IowaDepartment of Education, Bureau of Information andAna[,sis, Student Reporting in Iowa(EASIER) Files. Notes: = (Fc + TIC) / (F + TI _TO) FourYearCohort craduation Rate FG=First-time 9thgrade students in fall of200gandgraduated in 2012or before. TIG = students whotransferred intothecohort in grades 9 to l2 andgraduate in 2012or before. F = First-time 9thgrade student in falt of2008. TI = Transferred intothefirst-time 9thgraden'cohort in grades 9 to 12.TO : Transfer out(including deceased).
Page i of I
The percenI of slLr d ents prono ef I s c?lculated lrom lhe dzla sub milled tor rhe Adequat yearty progress (Ayp) Repod, nor rhe Annual Progress Reporl (APR ) The lculation is pedormed il the Iotat n umber of slu denls rakinq lhe tesl is 1O or arearer ti lewer rhdr 10 srLdenrs l o o l r h p r e s t ,t ^ e d . r a w r s h o w J \ \ A n 1 c o a r a l a o t pb . t o w . a . o w . t n o r o e c t r a n e o
l7 05 16 67 72.99
Exi.a Staie
http://wr"v.iowaschoolprofi[es.com/profileschart.asp?t:d&fl:1&12:2&11=l&s0-170100...31
:^ oI
o;. t,
p-
3
o o m
.'
15
a+
c .-J in
I
ll
R"
i O C
c O c
ts oO
.) I
tJ
FJ NJ O
-\
v
U
F'
c b o P
9
l - t 6 6 ; z ia, E i , 7 ! : :' g 6 a j
g
r g
3
+?
t o o
0)
:.
ID .E
i;
ET
6 ,
ri
&;
s
? 9
m
q) =
itrr !
6
tq
t;
l3
tF-
! 7 -l -l
c o m z --t o
I
-.1
m m 3 m z
J
a
-l
.E
f,.) tJ
o\
oa o
I
It
a a pa
o (t F
99
a
.D
i
;
i i I
9 g 6 a a
q
1 6
d
!q
o 3
o
o
(! 5
I a +
i
> :
FD
f3
E p)
3 E
;..
'd
o m
.\]
ll IJ l.J
t"r:
P *
{
IJ O
o\
O O
ft;l lq
L:]
l3 v
-.{
tTt -t c m
o_ I
z -.1 o
l
I tTl m
3 m z --l o
-t
N I!
c ?. \ ^
F o a tr trat
e
l-
s,
s
I ,
o o
E i
Pl 3
i
q) .t
o o
s
E
s
! l 9
3 o m
o
!) =
t-t
t) p
t)
o .-J
I
3 t- l
l.J -l
-..1 O O O
fd v
ld
.r.f f;9 !
le
-.1 -l
|n
-.1
I\J
c m z -.1
o
I
fr
m m z --l
o
-l
,+,/-a-
\
.:J
,-,<_)
--i \
Oj
:
o
,/:
F'
.)
(!
t
F! R'
a)
49
i, ,
l e rj.t:iStjl !. a a'. al
9 a
rE ;.
i : 9 9
iq 9 J
/ o.
:'Hf
';tt!
o
0)
.'
ao o
'=
6 l f t g I t1
E
! ID t_ !.
o.
3
m
C
; >
r;
Lr9
0)
-c
N
-J
I I
O O O O O
6l let
;3
_o
--l --l
m
--l
oI O O
c o m z -.{
I
m m 3 m z -t
E --l
, L
c-'-<
c'\
I!
--i-
)
::/_\
0q
IJ
o'
?9
? 6
1r R9
{ !)
(.)
;.
o o
, t r F :
f (1
4
i
a
q -o
-t
:
,d
f
Ft
!.
i\1
_a
3
& +
o m
A)
--- F
6 i
t-l
a*
trl ! lq
l3
t _ l --l
r i s,ii
I
: 9;
--l
m
-l
c o m
--l
o
I
m m z -l
ITI
--l
-r\
-.:
, t '
6-,-1
-i
.,.\ ---1,
o\
O
I "_,,'
! i
'c
-1-\
{ o
9
o
7
q)
-!
E
U
m
o p =
3
NJ O
.')
o
{ o
!) -!
m
o
d
t)
-o
T V,
:
.D
V
F
a
I
g
I g 9
o
e 9
{
i P _
E q
U o
-t
at
0 ;
J I !
5
'o
o
f s q 9
6
i 1 A
'o
m
!)
.-)
F+)
; ; : :
I 3
t^t :
Lr
tJ
3 q+
3
--1 --l
t
tl
O E
m
1a c
I
c o O c
5
m z --.1 c)
I
o I
F m m z -l o
-l
f\^i
r<-.,1-.
a
:7!
,j-__,
w () (./)
o ao
<_
o
! q I 9
F o o o
{ 0,
1 6 3
U
0) -t
7 G
s
t
z
g 9
9 t ' < . 9
g
'5
3 o m
A)
r-1
.];..
.d
' '
3
-rq
d i
tf.J
rl
v
!
ti
--l O
--l -.1
O O C
o ()
7 l
fr
m 3 m z -l
o
--l
- l
_'F/
.\ -J2
'f_
<r
aja
o\
N)
1-1
a
,
*
o
7f5
o
{
C'
o a
,'
It
t-1
9 ;
ID !
3
o
.' U
m
9r
'd .J
h
IJ
ts
O O O O O l O
R.
o
f.)
NJ t\,
oq a
2 i, o' |, o
l
la
::+
!
r
A
s
9
I it
: a
. 2 a A . 3 9
i t o
4 e
t !J
o o
A) .l
7 o
=. .)
.D
3 a!
7 t-1
.o
eE.
3
o
.FJ
r5
.., =
l
m
:
! a
- e R 3 t-l
i3
I
lt 9= 8 a
ts
-t
--l O O O O O
'J
m
-.t
c
I'l
5I
o_
I p m m 3 m z --t
R"
o -.{
I
.),
'E
s o\
NJ O
,-:-\ :l
F
i
_J
1
'n
r -
0 0 E t l
= a
3 6
@ 5 5 5 n t
g
e,: 6',
m :
a/,
OOOOOT
b i.r b c f o o
cn bo cf ir o e o o
:E i' a o
oJ
(,
C,] sJ
Gl
bo b irj b 6 0 6 0
6 i$ s s, co of ( f bo 0 o o o o 0
r =
(D
=
(, N c o o o (n o f,= l !
6' o
t
c N ( j ( ! J ( '
6) o)
A}
I
o =
5 6 '
-)
o o o N g t
< 4 d
o s
(D = (D
6 3 3 S DE
(lt
x
cr !q. o =
u
(.,
T
a q
( d (D c) (D x $
o
c
tD
r.)
o (D
(o
tu
t
U) o o ',!,t
; ! c Y ( D
ii'
C'
o o o o o o o o o o o
r N ( r r S ( ' t c D { @ @ o
t) o gt
GI
f
a!
3
in
g
@
c -
9. o
o
=
o
q, 5
.-
;l
a a
Percent Profcient
o
E E a o
q >
J 5
( . t c a -
) 5 ( ' o c l o
r o {
c n a l c f c f
A l
o c
e
c
9 f
p e o
89
= h J ( D m 3 o ( A
5
o c|
s 9t :. s E
Lr,
g
N)
o o -{
3 at
CD
i n H
Q Z (O
C)
CD CL (D
o o
: l = 6 J
s -,o
= =' g
.
*frt ; > q F
L O -
1r
lX
= c)
8 - cn
, ta a o
=3 H =
3 v,
t$ Cf ]\J
a a 5 E
A'o
qts
b
o
NJ (
(4} O
(Jr )
gt C l
*,1 O (
@ f (
{I}6 '
* e = >
u 3 o u
o o g
(A
=.l'
5
ll
r g )
ts
Fi.
hJ A {
G
oo
r =
3
o
J cf
ta
(.)
e. $
o 6) cs
EL (D
:I
o z o o
o o (o
; + q
=.s
3 ts =rn
N)
o
cl
; > o >
8 - cs
Bfr
e * c
EL
tJ
3 u)
t\) (f a\J
'I
orD
PercentProficient
( f o N o J o { l o ) t 5 q 3 t g r 0 0 ' ( \ { 3 o o ( 0 o 6
gf,
d ( D 'q )'
o o
o (
c 3
o o
P 9
= o
J1||
tnJ ii u, o o
i.J (f
o g)
g =.
s
3
t\)
Cf -.{
c
{D ./,
t.J (f cf @
F o o
E H( o
o z (l'o
c,
o)
; + s iHz nH ',> c)
g'> ; : a?
(D
=rL
9 H - o - r3 t, =
3 at
I
E 4 + o
= F i :
7.4 ilc F * :i
14 -r=
Profcient Percerfi
o o o o c f o c f o o o o ( 3 0 0 c
| \ ) ( . l ) $
l o f o
o o o
{ l
(
s o E
f
(
o
o
(
o
f
t o
o o
Nr
o c3
3 r)
o
=
, t
e 8 o \ { 0 g s = tO s A
m
a. (D
'
F
$
c9
a,
I N ) I O
3
(g
c,
c
AI IL
} > ( D
rn
('l}
o
an
( D ( f
N-)
= -J-
= v, F
rn
ts
F T i
9 c
o
CL
3 q,
tJ
hJ
PercenlProfcient
O
n 9
X F i :
4 g
= * o a = Ct
+ o
r -
) 4 O
r ( O
' r O
( (
'
b ob o b ( e 3 e
) 3
* O
@ O
Q d O
! l c -o_
o E
o
= J
FJ
(3
o (tl
a c}
o
hJ
O -..1
e
g
=
g
9
g hJ O
V,
o ;l .A
9. o o C) cs
tL (D
NJ
o o (o
ia
= ( D
l\)
6 E
o - , = =
o
(f
= 6
[ 0 m
= >
5 >
9 >
hJ (f
E n
! 4 C
> 8
e8
.o. o
3 an
t\) f N)
I
tlr I
Percent Profcient
o o c b 8 )
N
# 6' =ts
4 Q = . ;o = =
J
b 6
c -
l 6
b 6
o o -
o a o
o g c
o o c s Q a a r o o
g_q
=.
* a
hJ
3 Q a,
o a
a o
(]
o I
hJ (f G -.{
4
P
c
i.J
9 c
o o q)
o" (||
;r an
=l o 61
q)
,n
rn ]> rr rn - F
O - r
i.J
o o (o
(D
c^r
t\)
i q - ( D
= =
lg
a g s - J = 6
5 >
Cf
= > ni
n > + :
> &
F,)
a 9 ! 4 C
a 6 c
q (D
hJ
3 (4
hJ
9
a
o
5
n g
o q)
= (o
ii
@
=
t.)
9. o
o
=
o
g,
=
I
a L/)
g 4
q)'
J :
ti' (D
o i (:) r
o i r
o
o b (f
t\)
u o
i o
} o
'
3 b c f (
b b ) C f
*1 o b o
q) (o o c ) o c ) b b b c l o o
,.1
*e
= = + ( u g *
o o
5
i i
l+ 6
t\J
I .A
;
ct)
D I c
* !t F t
r cl o !
tt, c'
(D
o (D
Ci,
-
q) (D
b J
t-,
o
]
(D
(h
> rn
)t N)
'
I
9(D :l aA t\) O :
Profcient Percent a a
J :
g s
A'o
q >
c f t r
E
( b
3 c
'
o l
t)
G c -
) s ( ' r c ' ) - { C o ( 4 o o o o o c f , o l o b C l o b a a 6 o o o o o
89
a = o o
:'
= b. J ( D
o o
s o =. s E
9 g
a (D
N) O O CD
3 u,
l.J (f
(3 '{
(D
o
N} O O @
I
EL
(sl
c|
A) IL (D
q N ) + o
E o
u
F
rn
t : se9
I g
a. (D
:1
a^ Nl
cf :
I I
O A
Percent Profcient
( : o l o o
w
E g 6'o
q F
J :
O l
r f
'
'
b
,
a
l
89
a J
i o o o
3 A J ( D
s
U'
=.
s E
g
' q . (D
N) O O g)
Ll
f a,
\ =
A)
+ t s
o .A
F
z.
6| c$ a o
ts rn
:
I c
o. o
3 c,l
hJ
o
:
I rn
t
PercentProfcient
o
= 6 =
9 E (D
F'
a1 N)
o
6
C -
( .
r 3
s 0
, ( o
t f
c o O
t (
o 3
@ 0
o 0
E o
4 9
o 5 o a
c r '
NJ
a, o
= = (A c)
J
O (3
o o
o,
I g
g
=.
> 9 g
3 .A
V,
c)
(D (1 (D
(1(D
,n
u] t
6, o
hr
gt1
b " r) q tc
=$
SL .D
(rr
6'E
:t = (
b tTl
..-) o =
tJ
E e
-
a. (D
+ a,
t\)
hJ
Profcient Percent
t o c S l o o o o N E o J o o . l ) 5 ( . r r g r - { C O ( 0 ( ) o o o ( 3 c f o o o o o o o o o o c ) o o o o ( 6
u 9
6-o
= ] ' 1 :
xu)
=tc
F -* ! r Y
qt
c, o
=
6
p cn
R j.
o g
I g
a
=.
o o r
NJ
9 c
v
F
$
CL
o
c t
9 *
IL
'T
. x F =rn
o @
(lI
6') o a
(D
9 .-^) : I (O
A
J
N)
q o
-
aE
=
6
b rn F
a\J O
E
C
e t s
cL
J
o -|
..:
U' I$
g
NJ
PercentProfcient
4 9
d"(D = F a : 4 q Q c
ffO-
o o 6
o o
h J u ) ( 3 0 0 c o o c ( f ' eo 0 ( 3
5 ) o
( (
' f
t o
c f , c 3 ( 3
@ q c l c l a E | C 3 O E t r C ] l c )
6 q
f.J
o
('l
= * O . n a
C:]
a) (]
=
5 o J o o
a I g
=.
N) O (3 g)
s
=
N.)
O -r{
g
a" (D
=
a) A)
CD IL $
}\J
3 at
,n
-rn @ >
--ts
o o
@
=.) d L,r
q o
3 = ut
6-E
l.J
F
)r
cf
rTl
I c
.l
tJ
o (D
U)
NJ
l\J
3 f
c < o
+H-BA a5
A
- =-= .
c o o
z 3
dP
3
=-
9 P
! -
=. .
o 9
m
g d
q a tr = ;
rililr
=: 9 8 =
f
oql { i d
o o o
! 0 : 6
:E
6
ssQS
;ii
- z 3 z
=
d
o_ d
{
I
"o
I -
o
o i o 6 6 o a 5 5
H J
n
6 N
o
3 p
3A38,i3
o
o
l-)
.3. &
.E
q F
o o 3 { . d
o
i
?. v = g
f
n
l
o . o
o o
a
H @
l
o a
1 N
3
m ! o!l q g j
N 6
=-
i;
. ct
;r
t ai-o
712-243-4721
"WETHEPEOPLE OF SAINT PETER ANDPAULCATHOLIC CHURCH STRIVE TOFUFILL OUR CALLTOBE ONEWTHANDIN JESUS " CHRIST To Whom lt May Concernr
lam writingto give my whole heartedsupportof Cati Neville,as a candidate for Leadership Camp this summer.As the Directorof Youth Ministryat SS peter & Paul Church,I have had the privilege of workingwith Cati on severaloccasions duringher participation in variousyouth activities in our parish.She is alwayswilling to help out when needed.Cati also works well with the youngeryouth as well as the older youth and adults.Her willingness to share her gifts with others is what makesCati a wonderfulleaderin our youth group.On many occasions, Cati has been askedto step out of her comfortzone, to help completea task and has done so with an open heart. I believethis is what will make her a wonderfulcandidate for Leadership Camp this summer.
Page 1 of I
E-FILED 2013 MAR 28 4:40 PM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT
l ' 1 a r c2 h0 , 2 0 1 3 E x i r a - E HH KS2 0 1 2 - 2 0 1 3 422 Neville, Jennifer Suzanne Q3 GPAGradCr Cum GPAYr GPA 3.709 29.0003.841 3.820 ReportCard Grade:1 0
Q1Q2Q3rot A b sU n0 0 0 0 A b sE x1 1 5 . 57 . 5 T a t d y 2 O 2 4 Advisorl
Q3 Q4 Ex 52 Ex Yr Comment B + B.
Q1 Q2
D r a w& P a i n t Publication Production Al9 II Spanish II Biology World Studies PE Engiish 10 Draw & Paint Teegerstrom, A, D i x o n ,J . B o y s e nC , . Sloth, ll. A. Rasmussen, T P e t e r s e nH ,. D i x o n ,J . Teegerstrom, A.
51 A
B B +
B+
422
52 GPA 3.859
Cf Grad
Clm GPA
14.000
3.859
S2
YTGPA 3.859
)hys Science Traing itiength 1 \lgebra ll \m Hlstory g :ngljsh Fund )esign l lpanrsh Fund )esign
B*A
AA A - A A A A-
B+ A- A
A-
B*A
422
52 GPA 4.447
s1 52 Tot
YI GPA 4.077 Absenl 0 . 0 1 . 5 1 . 5
s1
Port.88 alth 88 Sclence 88 'eerEd88 th8 r. Studies 8 )rus7/8 -.nce 8 tish8 ,sEd7/8 iechBB 3B ]S 88 Watson, W. Hunrphfey, S Watson, W. Chnstensen, G Peiersen, T. Pitzen, A BlakeR. Witt.Lrp, C Yates, S. Petersen, L. Newton, D Madsen, A. Walson, N. A+ A* A+ A A+
A+
A* A* A, A.
A+ A+
A+ AA+
A + A
1 2012-201 uTaoe /
YTGPA 3.917
Ad7 PE7 7 Lfe Skills 7 Pre Algebra 7 English 7 S Studies 7 Sclence JH Chorlts
Q] Q2 L\ Sr 6A Science S. Studies 6A Technology 6AlB Art 64 P E6 A 6 A S t u d yH a l l Englis6 h4 M a t h6 A 6 Chorus 64 Science S.Stud es 6A Techno ogy 6418 Art 64 P E6 4 6 4 S t u d yH a l E n g l i s6 hA f,1ath 64 chorus 6 RBlake CBurns RBlake DDaiker LDreier JKliefoth Jwalker CJessen RNielsen RBake CBurns RBake DDaiker LDre i er JKllefoth ker JWa CJessen RNielsen
421
52 GPA 4.000 S2
YI GPA 3 989 Ex Yf
51 52 Tot A b s e n i0 . 0 1 0 1 0 T a d y 0 0 0
O2 5 rading :alth 5 5 )mputer 5 )c.St!dles 3th5 !sic5 5 Jldance 15 rysEd 5 5 lience rglish 5
A+
A+ A+ B + A
A A+
s
A
A A B+ A
E-FILED 2013 MAR 28 4:40 PM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT T I M O T H YJ K R E I F E L S D D S P C 402 POPLAR STREET ATLANTIC,IA 50022 (7121243-3275
C Maslercard
tr olher
JUDYNEVILLE 2 7 1 2E L ML A N E E L KH O R NI,A 5 1 5 3 1
Signalure
patient
Date
Procedure
Tooth
Fee
Due
Balance Due'"
800.00
/a+-oz/)
\/\q/l
Q,\er,,c ,,ri!u\
,.i,1c\1tl . "
(rr-!,fi) (.
'. ,\.--\.
(j.f-\rc
Cr[liL, G{XL\.:
\ {id-,-Gfr-raL
\
/,,1(
(,ai
ct,,,rn
t r l f- L F z
6l< (5 T-
,!!t
"r;
u, JI
irL_
v.t l o( Y!
/5rl_-
Nct
9oo
, f -
trco
50.761F2 A FINAN CE
A 17430S E OF I Z%
C HARG
<. ,!
- - J ' | \
4L
()
.A
?N
....\'
-.<a'
c-"
{'l --
>J
I
C'
a\
tr) \-_-2'
L9
-+ O
-T
v 5
(f
7 ra'
-f,
L '
>+
.U
6 =
o
N
g ;
o
=
f o l
-t o l o J
=
.D
:.
o
l
d =
ll
o
l O g
3 q
o d o_ c_ q. (a o
l
o c
-o :+o f-
" tir,;ii , rrnnir;" i,r:'r,rrc: n,rri rr I'r,rr , tillS Fi;3,'! "." lll {fin1,"rrti iytr.f ".,.i'i-,,",r#!t{..1"
i .'r''
.. rr ":-
sgryill-=lil|:.:=--J9"*9*J:-"-*.'#:=J":ii'---::
ADA Dental Alomenclature No-Veterans procedlrres an'l Nomenclature/Tooth
FEE Tooih
Code
)''
'
':it;'
O|ACT]OS'IIC D0120Period.
- 3 a : 3 0 P a n o li
i: Frr:
l j D i l 2 2 ! n l r a o i , ' 1l l a v S l f q r e 1 rl I DC:ll0 inira.rrr-l\dd FlLn e : n 0 2 7 0 B ( e ! ' /r r t X R a YS L n g ' l:r)!,/B:lewift Add Fllnl* I'P'EVENTIVE i ll li! '.i12 L . ! r i t f D l l : 1 0 C h ld P r o P h Y | j r . r i d ol r e a t m e n t ; l v q . - ' r on s t f u c t i o n O S A LS I ] R G L R Y fl!)7 r10 Erla.tc|l t7l:nAdd'Teth D27 D28 S D T S D21
co\n"oslrL
D23)J o# /'s
D23 _,
o"
_ D.r3
s
$
_ s
C B O W NR E S T O R A T I O N S
, , L r l 3 3 r lO ,
S .
..
D2a
BRIOGE FIXED $
$
'i
D
D67
R o o tC a n a) E N D O D O N T I C{ S
D?
TODAY'S CHARGES
74750
6 6 35 b 4 1 69 T ' U 1 0
STATEMENT
ADDXE"Ss' SERVICE
l5r5) 222-Lrr7
llr' iL ijr,ll\: i\!i. EFl
A 9
o 7/ r o / 7 2
u. l t:t ita !.ii: 'i
74750
a - 1 i , " : - r i i tl i ; - 1 1 i | a E i
01
:,ria ^,rr
7 ' t5 . 7 5
!ri Lri:-.- r,i.al
>0t08n -!81a50 001 [:-0tt JUDITH L NEVILLE 2712 ELM LN ELK HORNIA 5 1 53 1 - 5 1 1 6
E q
V I S I T O F F I C E O R O O T P A T . I N TE S T C A T E L Y N NJ coLDEN RULE 3?602 # 1?1539 Filett e o L D E NR O L E 3 c$ 1715391 D6ductibl ?0.90 W R I T E - O F FG O L D E N ROLE c{ 1?15391
CAT]L I5!5J
222-1!!!
t,L),li-I
o1/lo/t2
| |
r '.:
?4?50
S E N D] N O U | R E ST O
RONALD S BERG[,'].N DO pC 2000 GBI\I{D AVENOE 222_a1A1 rf you cannot pay
rhis
balance
9:a96S1ra-a
s =l.r
:xu L9tt9z9
Q :z > L -tt ./
-rm
r-\ z l
NNA'13IVC 31"llA:lN
z'_
Ufu
(r
z = lli t ! . '\\ -
NNAl3-wC r'l-'llA:lN
a
o
<= z-
4 - r Z=
>i
o.l LUF
al
NEVILLE CATELYNN
2 7 1 2E L ML N E L K H O R NI A 5 1 5 3 1 02115i2A12 012)21392?3
zt
o-
N o : 1 o l2 Page
-n'-a(,,''n -Tr'J('{(,D)<)<
d g U ' < ; i:
=3f;N ' 83 35--" ;- I
= J
OD\OD_ --.1 rrttN-!( -!olrro-a\o rE l E --.J (nNr-ooo (,l sr Ir! - lroo\oooo\-oo=e >H =o!{.=Fi a, orro\o-o-aox-7)E --{o-{AJouro-J tn -< -< --JCr O-6-!-l-!(r 5 m --.r r< --.r \o ca ('l -! -! d\ -+ E:i acr c:z:D :DA)<)satA 'n'n 'T:'Tl oc>oooo E
"r=-=:3q,
Ei q Fi
-
-?ii=-ii q, F ::. A
-;N
i*!
t"^
\o \o
\.o
\,
ra
,\
a :
6 l
, l
; I
q
se
I I I
ta . t:fN
t - l
t>l
t.lA i>J l>
I --l
l F t._'
6
l z
l t -> t
t {
:
d
l ,
Lj
a O
a +e
* 6
l-' I I
1.: l-*
aa
IOWA DISTRICT COURT FOR SAC COUNTY In Re the Marriage Of JUDITH NEVILLE and DAVID NEVILLE Up n The !etiti n Of JUDITH NEVILLE" !etiti ner" And C n#erning DAVID NEVILLE" Re$p ndent% Trial in the above matter commenced on March 28, 2013. At that time Judith Neville appeared personally alon !ith her attorney "harles #chulte. $avid Neville NO% CDDM&&'()( RULIN* ON !ETITION TO MODIFY
appeared personally alon !ith his attorney James %. &an $y'e. $avid Neville (iled a !ETITION TO MODIFY !RIMARY CARE on July 31, 2012. $avid Neville see's to modi(y the terms o( a dissolution o( marria e decree (iled )ctober 20, 2000, as it pertains to the primary physical care o( t!o minor children, Jenni(er *dob 12+,+1--,. and "atelynn *dob 2+2,+2000.. The /etition as (iled by $avid alle es that there has been a material and substantial chan e in circumstances !hich !ould re0uire the "ourt to order chan e o( physical care o( the children that bein in their best interest. #peci(ically $avid Neville alle es that the children have a stron desire to chan e
residence to live !ith their (ather, that Judith Neville has promised to move to )maha, that Judith Neville has treated or mistreated the minor children and (inally that Judith has (ailed to (ollo! her medically re0uired re imen o( medication !hich has caused mood s!in s and e1treme stress to the children. Judith Neville has (iled an ans!er and counterclaim denyin the alle ations as contained in $avid2s petition and (urther re0uested the "ourt to increase child support that has been ordered payable by $avid because there has been a si ni(icant and material chan e in the (inancial circumstances o( the parties !hich !ould re0uire recalculation and increase in the child support. The "ourt has revie!ed the dissolution (ile and notes that Judith Neville (iled
1
her /etition (or $issolution o( Marria e on January 20, 2000. The dissolution !as tried on )ctober 3, 2000, and the "ourt on November 2-, 2000, entered its 3indin s o( 3act, "onclusions o( 4a!, Jud ment and $ecree. At that time Jenni(er !as (our years o( a e and "atelynn !as seven months old. The "ourt incorporated the STI!ULATION
RE*ARDIN* VISITATION dated )ctober 20, 2000, !herein the parties a reed that the physical care o( the t!o minor children !ould be !ith Judith Neville. That stipulation also set (orth a visitation schedule. 3or the ne1t number o( years the court (ile re(lects numerous court involvement !ith the parties, primarily child support and custodial matters. 5t appears clear to the "ourt that this matter, li'e many other dissolution proceedin s, continues !ith on oin disa reements especially !hen children are involved. Jenni(er and "atelynn !ere e1tremely youn at the time o( the dissolution and althou h the ori inal decree+stipulation has remained in e((ect, both Judith and $avid have chan ed livin arran ements, chan ed employment, become involved !ith ne! partners. Jenni(er and "atelynn have attempted ad6ustments throu hout these years. 7hen children reach teena e years, it becomes e1tremely important (or their best interest that their mother and (ather act responsibly and to 'eep at the (ore(ront !hat is in the best interest o( their children. 8n(ortunately the Nevilles have been unable to ad6ust appropriately. 3rom testimony o( !itnesses in these proceedin s alon !ith the testimony o( Judith Neville it is apparent she is an a ressive and concerned mother alon !ith bein
e1tremely busy and dedicated to her current employment. 9er time spent a!ay (rom home is re0uired !hich leaves more (reedom (or her dau hters. 5t should come as no surprise to Judith and $avid that such circumstances lead to con(lict. $avid does not appear to be as driven as Judith. 9e has not consistently and daily been involved !ith his dau hters2 activities and lives and thus has not been re0uired to be a :parent; as his dau hters mature and develop ne! habits and desires. <oth Jenni(er and "atelynn are e1tremely bri ht as evidenced by their school rades. They are involved in e1tra curricular activities and are driven (or success. <oth irls attend =l' 9orn>?imballton "ommunity #chool $istrict and have
2
achieved reat success there. The testimony o( teachers, coaches and e1hibits provided by Judith truly re(lect ho! hard !or'in , industrious and intelli ent both irls are. )ne o( the primary reasons o((ered (or the re0uest o( the chan e in physical care is the potential move by Judith to )maha, Nebras'a !here she currently has been employed (or a number o( years. That concern or (ear has not been substantiated by credible evidence. 5n (act, Judith testi(ies that she has no intention o( movin to )maha. <oth "atelynn and Jenni(er !ould move (rom their current school district to the $enison "ommunity #chool in the event $avid Neville !ere to receive primary physical care. Judith has o((ered a number o( e1hibits comparin the $enison "ommunity #chool and =l' 9orn> ?imballton #chool. As it pertains to raduation rate, readin and other pro(iciency
cate ories such as math, science, enerally spea'in , the =l' 9orn>?imballton #chool $istrict rates hi her than $enison "ommunity #chool $istrict in these cate ories. The court notes that the $enison #chool $istrict has a total enrollment o( 2,28@ students. The =l' 9orn>?imballton #chool $istrict has a total enrollment o( 23A students. Althou h a lar er school district may provide ne! and reater opportunities (or a student, the
evidence presented by Judith !ould not veri(y that. %ather it could be determined that the =l' 9orn>?imballton #chool $istrict !ould perhaps provide a Jenni(er and "atelynn. The testimony o( Jenni(er and "atelynn clearly establishes con(rontation !ith their mother. 5t is disturbin to note that Jenni(er in particular re(ers to her mother as :Judy; rather than :mom; and o((ers the statement that Judy does not deserve to be called mom. An interestin observation+evaluation by a youn teena e irl. The "ourt notes that much o( the testimony o( the t!o irls relates to reater opportunity (or
behavior in the past. The current disa reements are dissatis(action !ith their present custodial arran ement probably !as ma ni(ied !hen a disa reement at home ave rise to a su estion by Judith that she had breast cancer and that the (amily may have to move
(rom their current residence. The interpretation by the t!o irls and Judith di((er some!hat as to the emphasis placed on all o( these alle ations but it is clear that the evenin 2s discussion resulted in the t!o irls leavin , their (ather $avid pic'in them up and ta'in
3
them to his home !ithout the 'no!led e or consent o( Judith. <oth irls ac'no!led e that i( in (act the "ourt rants the re0uest (or a chan e in physical care that a ne! school district !ould become a reality. The "ourt (inds no credible reasonin (or a chan e in school district based upon the current levels o( success achieved by both Jenni(er and "atelynn. 5n addition to academic chan es, there !ould appear to be a reat chan e in social environment and iven the a es o( Jenni(er and "atelynn that !ould be no easy underta'in . Testimony reveals that $avid has lived !ith his ne! irl(riend+(iancB !ho also has a son in colle e and one still in hi h school. The blendin o( these (amilies could present un'no!n problems. 7ithout 0uestion the testimony o( Jenni(er and "atelynn reveals their desire to live !ith their (ather. The reasons o((ered at the time o( hearin althou h disheartenin to a parent are real in the minds o( the irls. Their belie( that their li(e !ould be less complicated !ith their (ather is based upon the limited time spent !ith him since the dissolution *2000. and his minimal involvement and their day to day problems. 7ithout 0uestion, Judith demands certain thin s (rom her dau hters but the "ourt !ould concur that Judith has the best interest o( her dau hters !hen she re0uires compliance in school !or' and household and social activities. The rearin o( children is best served by t!o concerned parents on board !ith the same oals (or the children. $issolutions create only additional barriers to the rearin o( healthy, happy and are oal driven children. The le al system o((ers no ma ic (ormula, no uarantees and can only attempt to resolve those issues brou ht be(ore the "ourt based on the evidence presented. The "ourt continues to remind parents that the system has at the (ore(ront !hat is in the best interest o( the child !hich sometimes are con(licts !ith the desires o( the child. Modi(ication o( a decree is appropriate only i( a material and substantial chan e in circumstances has occurred and i( the chan e !as not contemplated by the "ourt issuin the ori inal decree. In Re Marriage of Sjulin C31 N.7. 2d @@3, In Re Marriage of Full, 2AA N7 2d 1A3. The party see'in a modi(ication has the burden to prove that a substantial chan e in circumstances has occurred ma'in it e0uitable and 6ust
4
that di((erent terms be (i1ed. In Re Marriage of Lee, C8, N.7. 2d 302. A heavy burden is placed on the party see'in modi(ication o( custody based on the principle that once custody is (i1ed, it should be disturbed only (or the most co ent reasons. In Re Marriage Bergman C,, N.7. 2d 2@C. 5n a modi(ication o( custody, the 0uestion is not !hich home is better, but !hether the movin party can o((er superior care. 5( both parties can e0ually administer to the children, custody should not be chan ed. The burden (or the party petitionin (or a chan e in custody is heavy. In Re Marriage Rosenfeld, A2C N.7. 2d 212. 7hen a child is o( su((icient a e, intelli ence, and discretion to e1ercise and enli hten 6ud ment, his or her !ishes, thou h no controllin , may be considered by the "ourt, !ith other relevant (actors, determinin child custody ri hts. In Re Marriage of Thielges, ,23 N7. 2d 232. A child2s pre(erence :is entitled to less !ei ht in a modi(ication action than !ould be iven in an ori inal custody proceedin .; In Re Marriage of Hunt, C@, N.7. 2d --. The "ourt ac'no!led es the testimony o( both Jenni(er and "atelynn and their desires to live !ith their (ather. The "ourt also (inds that both irls are doin
e1tremely !ell in school, are involved in e1tra> curricular activities in !hich they e1cel and no testimony su ests that in these areas they are de(icient. The "ourt ac'no!led es the
testimony o((ered by the /etitioner and the %espondent and places reater !ei ht on those !itnesses !ho are some!hat neutral and are only testi(yin to their observance and e1perience, such as school counselor and coaches. Judith Neville2s children by a previous relationships, have o((ered testimony !hich su ests that t!o teena e dau hters !ould
have con(lict !ith their mother and iven their ability to leave home and reside !ith their (ather provides them !ith the options not necessarily available to many (amilies. The "ourt believes $avid Neville has ood intentions as it pertains to his dau hters but has not been re0uired to deal !ith t!o dau hters on a daily basis. 5n determinin physical custody, ori inally both Judith and $avid ac'no!led ed that Judith !ould be the pre(erable physical custodial parent and both parents should have ac'no!led ed di((iculties that !ould arise in the maturin process o( the irls and !hich parent !ould be better suited to be a more e((ective custodian. $avid2s re0uest (or a
5
chan e in physical care is based primarily on conversations !ith his dau hters. 9e truly has a very limited personal 'no!led e o( the events testi(ied to by the irls. 9is petition alle es that Judith has (ailed to (ollo! her medically re0uired re imen o( medications but no testimony is o((ered to substantiate that position. The primary reason (or $avid2s re0uest in these proceedin s is based upon the re0uest o( his dau hters. 5n this case, the "ourt has been (aced !ith t!o teena e irls testi(yin in the (orm o( :complaints; about their mother and the rules and the manner in !hich she handles discipline. Judith Neville as the mother o((ers e1planation and corrections in some o( the interpretations o( her dau hters, all o( !hich cannot stren then the relationship o( mother and dau hters. This is e1tremely un(ortunate. 5t appears Judith and her dau hters have attempted counselin , !hich the "ourt !ould encoura e. 8nderstandin o( both mother and dau hters o( their relationship !ould only be help(ul in the (e! years be(ore the irls reach adulthood. 5nsu((icient testimony+e1hibits have been o((ered as it pertains to income and e1penses o( the /etitioner and the %espondent. No child support uideline !or'sheets have been o((ered or discussed and accordin ly the "ourt !ill deny the re0uest (or modi(ication o( child support. The "ourt (inds that $avid Neville has (ailed to provide su((icient evidence to establish a material and substantial chan e in circumstances since the date o( the decree not contemplated by the parties, !hich !ould re0uire a chan e in the physical custody o( Jenni(er and "atelynn. ORDER IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the !etiti n t M dif+ !ri,ar+ Care (iled July 31, 2012, is hereby dismissed !ith costs to $avid Neville. $ated this April 10, 2013. "ler' to (or!ard copies toD
"harles #chulte James &an $y'e
State of Iowa Courts Type: Case Number CDDM001353 OTHER ORDER Case Title JUDITH L NEVILLE VS DAVID GENE NEVILLE So Ordered
page 7 of 7
State of Iowa Courts Type: Case Number CDDM001353 CERTIFIED NOTICE OF APPEAL Case Title JUDITH L NEVILLE VS DAVID GENE NEVILLE So Ordered
page 2 of 2
IN THE IOWA DISTRICT COURT FOR SAC COUNTY UPON THE PETITION OF JUDITH LUCILLE NEVILLE Petitioner, vs. NOTICE OF HEARING AND CONCERNING DAVID GENE NEVILLE Res on!ent.
NO. CDD"##$%&%
PURSUANT to Io'( Co!e C)( ter *&*H, t)e (+ove ,(tter '(s -erti.ie! to t)e Co/rt. T)e (+ove0entit1e! -(se is set .or )e(rin2 to t)e Co/rt on t)e *n! !(3 o. De-e,+er *#$%, (t #45%# A.", (t t)e -o/rt)o/se in S(- Cit3, Io'(. T)e (rties (re !ire-te! to erson(113 ( e(r (t t)e (+ove ti,e (n! 1(-e. T)e C1er6 s)(11 noti.3 o. t)e ti,e .i7e! +3 ,(i1in2 ( -o 3 to e(-) o. t)e .o11o'in25 Child Support Recovery Unit J(!e H(ver,(nn Assist(nt Attorne3 Gener(1 8*& N. West St. PO 9o7 4%: C(rro11, IA &$;#$ CSC< ;;:=#& David G. Neville
Judith L. Neville
I. 3o/ nee! (ssist(n-e to (rti-i (te in -o/rt !/e to ( !is(+i1it3, -(11 t)e !is(+i1it3 -oor!in(tor (t 8;$0;*$0#44#. Persons ')o (re )e(rin2 or s ee-) i, (ire! ,(3 -(11 Re1(3 Io'( TTY >$0=##0:%&0*4;*?. Disability Coordinators cannot provide le al advice.
State of Iowa Courts Type: Case Number CDDM001353 ORDER SETTING HEARING Case Title JUDITH L NEVILLE VS DAVID GENE NEVILLE So Ordered
page 2 of 2
2RCV55 IN THE IOWA DISTRICT COURT FOR SAC COUNTY STATE OF IOWA, ex rel., JUDITH LUCILLE NEVILLE STATE OF IOWA EX REL ,
COURT REPORTER MEMORANDUM (The court reporter shall file this memorandum with the district court clerk.) Appearances: For Plaintiff/Petitioner: Jade Haverman For Defendant/Respondent: Did not appear Other: Judith Neville Information required by Iowa Rule of Civil Procedure 1.903(3): I, Tara Gibson, am providing the following information as required by Iowa Rule of Civil Procedure 1.903(3): 1. The type of proceeding that was reported: 252H Hearing 2. The date(s) on which the proceeding occurred: December 2, 2013 3. The name of the court reporter who reported the proceeding: Tara Gibson 4. The name of the judge who presided over the proceeding: Gary McMinimee 5. The reporting fee for the proceeding: $40.00 6. We, the undersigned judge before whom the above-entitled case was tried, and the official court reporter who, by order of the Court, reported the same, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing is the report of the whole proceedings upon the trial and/or hearing of the above-entitled cause made and taken pursuant to the order and direction of the Court, in accordance with Iowa Code Section 624.10. /s/Tara Gibson _________________________________________
1 of 2
State of Iowa Courts Case Number CDDM001353 Type: Case Title JUDITH L NEVILLE VS DAVID GENE NEVILLE COURT REPORTER MEMORANDUM AND CERTIFICATE So Ordered
2 of 2
IOWA DISTRICT COURT FOR SAC COUNTY In Re the Marriage Of JUDITH LUCILLE NEVILLE and DAVID GENE NEVILLE U !n The "etiti!n Of JUDITH LUCILLE NEVILLE# "etiti!ner# And C!n$erning DAVID GENE NEVILLE# Re% !ndent& A 252H Hearing to modify child support was held on December 2, 2013. udith appeared without counsel. Da!id did not appear. "#$% appeared by Assistant Attorney &eneral ade Ha!erman. 'he parties( dissolution decree was filed on )o!ember 2*, 2000. +t awarded udith physical care of the parties( two children and ordered Da!id to pay udith monthly child support in the sum of ,505.-2. $egarding child medical support the decree pro!ided. During the time Da!id is obligated to pro!ide support for a child, udith shall pro!ide health insurance for the child. Da!id shall reimburse her one half of the health insurance premium. udith shall pay the first ,250 per year per child of unco!ered medical e/penses up to a ma/imum of ,500 per year. %nco!ered medical e/penses in e/cess of ,250 per child or a ma/imum of ,500 per year for all children shall be paid 25.30 by udith and 1-.30 by Da!id. udith was awarded the oldest child as an e/emption and Da!id was awarded the youngest child as an e/emption. "#$% in these proceedings determined that Da!id(s support obligation for the two children should be ,232.3*, based on udith ha!ing a gross monthly income of ,-,322.13 and Da!id ha!ing a gross income of ,2,*23.50. udith did not agree with "#$%(s determination of Da!id(s support obligation and re4uested the December 2, 2013 hearing. udith does not appear to ob5ect to "#$%(s determination of her gross monthly income. udith has insurance on the children. 'he cost of her family policy is A single policy is a!ailable at a cost of ,321.*2 per month. ,223.02 per month. NO& CDDM''()*) ORDER
Accordingly, the cost for co!ering the children is ,2*5.1- per month.
udith disagrees with "#$%(s determination of Da!id(s gross monthly income. #he contends that Da!id(s income should be set higher based on Da!id(s 6arch 23, 2013, affida!it indicating his wage as a mechanic with 7uality 'ruc8 #er!ice was ,3*,000 per year, her representation that the %.#. 9ureau of :abor and #tatistics indicates that the wage for an entry le!el mechanic in +owa is ,-0,350 and her belief that Da!id earned money in addition to his wage. Although Da!id became self;employed during 2013, "#$% based its determination of Da!id(s gross income on wages his employer reported for the last half of 2012, the first 4uarter of 2013 and eight wee8s of the second 4uarter of 2013. 'here was no e!idence presented that his actual self;employment income is anything more or less. +n this court(s !iew, the basis for "#$%(s determination of Da!id(s wage is more reliable than Da!id(s self;reporting or data from the %.#. 9ureau of :abor and #tatistics. $egarding udith(s belief that Da!id had income while employed in addition to his wage, there was no e!idence offered to support her belief. "onsidering the forgoing, this court is of the !iew that udith should continue to pro!ide health insurance for the children and Da!id should continue to reimburse her for one half of the premium all in accordance with the original decree. Da!id should pay child support and the parties should share unco!ered medical e/penses in accordance with the following <or8sheet.
I. Net Monthly Income of Petitioner, David Neville [ ] Custodial Parent [X] Noncustodial Parent [ ] Joint Physical Care Petitioner claims 1 child as tax dependents. Sources and Amounts of Annual Income: T T!"# B. Federal Tax Deduction: *ross !nnual Taxa+le ,ncome less 1-( sel./employment 01,C!2 tax# less .ederal ad5ustments to income less personal exemptions, sel. plus 1 dependents less standard deduction .ilin8 as sin8le Net taxa+le income / .ederal# 1ederal Tax "ia+ility# 1ederal Tax Credits 1inal .ederal tax lia+ility# State Tax Deduction: *ross !nnual Taxa+le ,ncome# less 1-( sel. employment 01,C!2 tax# less .ederal tax lia+ility 0ad5usted .or dependent tax credit2 less standard deduction .ilin8 as sin8le Net taxa+le income / state# :tate tax lia+ility 0ta+les2# $1,&9&.') $%&,'((.)) 3).))4 36,7)).))4 3',1)).))4 $(1,6((.)) $(,71(.)& 31,))).))4 31,71(.)&4 $%&,'((.)) 3).))4 31,71(.)&4 31,9)).))4 $%1,9)9.9& $%&,'((.))
A.
C.
less pers-dep. credits# plus school district surtax 0);2 less tax credits 1inal state tax lia+ility# D.
Social Security and Medicare Tax Mandatory Pension Deduction: !nnual earned income# ,ncome not su+5ect to 1,C!# $).)) !pplica+le rate 06.'&; or 1&.%; as ad5usted2 !nnual :ocial :ecurity and <edicare tax lia+ility "ther Deductions #Annual$: 1. <andatory occupational license .ees# (. =nion dues# %. !ctual medical support paid pursuant to court order or administrative order in another order .or other children, not the pendin8 matter# >. Prior o+li8ation o. child support and spouse support actually paid pursuant to court or administrative order# &. Deductions .or ) additional ?uali.ied dependents# '. Child care expenses# 0present action2 less .ederal tax credits# less state tax credits# less state tax re.und# Net child care expenses#
3(,6(&.)74 3).))4 3).))4 3).))4 3).))4 3).))4 $).)) 3).))4 3).))4 3).))4 3).))4 $(9,&'9.(6 $(,>'>.11 $).)) $(,>'>.11
!.
Preliminary Net Annual Income: Preliminary A%era&e Monthly Income of Petitioner 6. <onthly Cash <edical :upport ordered in this pendin8 action Ad'usted Net Monthly Income of Petitioner II. N!T M"NT()* INC"M! "F +!SP"ND!NT, Judith Neville [X] Custodial Parent [ ] Noncustodial Parent [ ] Joint Physical Care @espondent claims 1 child as tax dependents. A. Sources and Amounts of Annual Income: T T!"# B. Federal Tax Deduction: *ross !nnual Taxa+le ,ncome less 1-( sel./employment 01,C!2 tax less .ederal ad5ustments to income less personal exemptions, sel. plus 1 dependents less standard deduction .ilin8 as head o. household Net taxa+le income / .ederal# 1ederal Tax "ia+ility# 1ederal Tax Credits .or Dependent Children 1inal .ederal tax lia+ility# State Tax Deduction: *ross !nnual Taxa+le ,ncome# less 1-( sel. employment 01,C!2 tax# less .ederal tax lia+ility 0ad5usted .or dependent tax credit2 less standard deduction .ilin8 as Aead o. Aousehold Net taxa+le income / state# :tate tax lia+ility 0ta+les2# $(,%91.>1 less pers-dep. credits# 31().))4 plus school district surtax 0);2 ).)) less tax credits 3).))4 1inal state tax lia+ility# Social Security and Medicare Tax Mandatory Pension Deduction: !nnual earned income# ,ncome not su+5ect to 1,C!# $).)) $&1,9(1.%' 3).))4 36,7)).))4 37,9&).))4 $%&,161.%' $>,'%7.() 31,))).))4
$&1,9(1.%'
C.
3(,(61.>14 $&1,9(1.%'
D.
!pplica+le rate 06.'&; Ba8es or 1&.%; sel./employment as ad5usted2 !nnual :ocial :ecurity and <edicare tax lia+ility !. "ther Deductions #Annual$: 1. <andatory occupational license .ees# (. =nion dues# %. !ctual medical support paid pursuant to court order or administrative order in another order .or other children, not the pendin8 matter# >. Prior o+li8ation o. child support and spouse support actually paid pursuant to court or administrative order# &. Deductions .or ) additional ?uali.ied dependents# '. Child care expenses# 0present action2 less .ederal tax credits# less state tax credits# less state tax re.und# Net child care expenses#
3%,961.974 3).))4 3).))4 3).))4 3).))4 3).))4 $).)) 3).))4 3).))4 3).))4 3).))4 $>(,)%9.66 $%,&)%.%1 $).)) $%,&)%.%1
Preliminary Net Annual Income: Preliminary A%era&e Monthly Income of +es,ondent 6. <onthly Cash <edical :upport ordered in this pendin8 action Ad'usted Net Monthly Income of +es,ondent III. Calculation of the -uideline Amount of Su,,ort Custodial Parent [ ] Petitioner [X] @espondent !. !d5usted Net <onthly ,ncome E. Proportional :hare o. ,ncome C. Num+er o. Children .or Fhom :upport is :ou8ht D. Easic :upport +li8ation =sin8 nly NCPGs !d5usted Net <onthly ,ncome H. Easic :upport +li8ation =sin8 Com+ined !d5usted Net <onthly ,ncome 1. Hach ParentGs :hare o. the Easic :upport +li8ation =sin8 Com+ined ,ncomes *. NCPGs Easic :upport +li8ation Ee.ore Aealth ,nsurance A. Cost o. Child0ren2Gs Aealth ,nsurance Premium ,. Aealth ,nsurance !dd/ n or Deduction 1rom NCPGs +li8ation J. *uideline !mount o. Child :upport .or NCP $1>6.&6 C $%,&)%.%1 &7.6)6>; C C Noncustodial Parent [X] Petitioner [ ] @espondent $(,>'>.11 >1.(9('; D D
Com.ined
$&,9'6.>( 1)); (
N-!
$1,&6%.))
$9(%.>6
$7'.'% $'(%.7>
/. Chan&es in Child Su,,ort ".li&ation as Num.er of Children !ntitled to Su,,ort Chan&es 01or cases Bith multiple children +ased on present income and applica+le 8uidelines calculation method2# /. a. Basic ".li&ation Num+er o. Children 1 NCPGs Easic :upport +li8ation $>&>.'% Aealth ,nsurance !dd/on or Deduction $7'.'% Hxtraordinary Iisitation Credit $).)) *uideline !mount o. Child :upport $>(7.9>
ORDER IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the attorney for "#$% shall submit to the "ourt a proposed order in the usual form with respect to child support and child medical support, consistent with the foregoing "hild #upport &uideline <or8sheet and determinations regarding health insurance. Dated this December 11, 2013. "ler8 to forward copies to. "#$% udith )e!ille Da!id )e!ille
State of Iowa Courts Type: Case Number CDDM001353 OTHER ORDER Case Title JUDITH L NEVILLE VS DAVID GENE NEVILLE So Ordered
page 6 of 6
Case No: 02811 CDDM001353 EXHIBIT LIST 252H December 2, 2013 Presiding Judge: Gary McMinimee
The following exhibits were offered and admitted by the Court at the hearing as shown above: CSRU's Exhibits 1. Child Support Guideline Worksheet 2. Letter to Child Support Recovery Unit requesting a hearing 3. Child Support Guideline Worksheets
1 of 2
State of Iowa Courts Case Number CDDM001353 Type: Case Title JUDITH L NEVILLE VS DAVID GENE NEVILLE EXHIBIT LIST So Ordered
2 of 2
tate of &esidence IA IA
+$:ee
T"e 1"%)0 en $((e1!e0 5: !"e 'n&'%n& 36**' ! ' 0e (3) $ e> Affected C'ild*s Name C.,.N. ,.S.N. Date of +irt' 2000 1??@
5
T"e Un%! 1'n3%0e e0 !"e ('))'9%n& 'n&'%n& 36**' ! ' 0e > $ssuin# tate I'9$ $ssuin# Count) S$1 Doc-et Num"er CDD#001353 File tam!ed Date 11/2?/2000 u!!ort Amount A505.42 *e 4'n!"
3. ,60%!" 3"'6)0 1'n!%n6e !' * 'v%0e "e$)!" %n36 $n1e (' !"e 1"%)0 en $n0 D$v%0 3"'6)0 1'n!%n6e !' e%456 3e "e (' 'ne "$)( '( !"e * e4%64 $)) %n $11' 0$n1e 9%!" !"e ' %&%n$) 0e1 ee. D$v%0B3 "$)( '( !"e 1"%)0 enB3 * e4%64 %3 A147.57 *e 4'n!". 4. T"e %n1'4e $n0 0e061!%'n3 '( !"e *$ en!3 $ e 0e31 %5e0 %n !"e ' 0e (%)e0 "e e%n 'n De1e45e 17 / 2013. .H/&/FO&// !"e C'6 !/ $11' 0%n& !' 1"$*!e 252H/ CONC01D/ AND O&D/& % 1. A11' 0%n& !' !"e 3!$n0$ 03 '( 3e1!%'n 252<.207/ !"e 1'n! '))%n& 'n&'%n& 36**' ! ' 0e %3 !"e I'9$ ' 0e en!e e0 %n S$1 C'6n!:/ D'1=e! N645e CDD#001353. T"%3 ' 0e %3 1'n! '))%n& 5e1$63e %! %3 !"e 'n): =n'9n 'n&'%n& 36**' ! ' 0e %n eC%3!en1e. 2. E((e1!%ve 'n !"e 0$!e !"e C'6 ! en!e 3 !"%3 ' 0e / !"e 1'n! '))%n& ' 0e (3)/ $3 $0863!e0/ %3/$ e !"e 'n): en(' 1e$5)e 'n&'%n& 36**' ! '5)%&$!%'n. In !"e even! !"e e %3 $n'!"e eC%3!%n& ' 0e / !"e 'n&'%n& 36**' ! '5)%&$!%'n 3e! 5: !"e '!"e ' 0e %3 !e 4%n$!e0 $n0 6nen(' 1e$5)e. H'9eve / 36**' ! $ e$ $&e3 !"$! $11 6e0 $3
!"
*447805*
An: * %' * ' $!%'n '( !"e '5)%&$!%'n $4'n& !"e 1"%)0 en en!%!)e0 !' 36**' ! %3 v'%0. I( !"e e $ e 46)!%*)e *$:ee3/ !"e
T"e ev%e9 9$3 5$3e0 'n $ e76e3! 3654%!!e0 5: ,60%!" -. Nev%))e. T"e *$ !:B3 3!$!e '( e3%0en1e $! !"e !%4e !"e Un%! %336e0 !"e N'!%1e '( In!en! !' Rev%e9. 3 T"e *$ en! '5)%&$!e0 !' *$: 36**' !. T"e C'6 ! "$3 *e 3'n$) 86 %30%1!%'n 've !"e *$:' 5e1$63e !"e *$:' e3%0e3 %n I'9$. 4 T"e *e 3'n en!%!)e0 !' e1e%ve 36**' ! 'n 5e"$)( '( !"e 1"%)0( en). T"e C'6 ! "$3 *e 3'n$) 86 %30%1!%'n 've !"e *$:ee 5e1$63e !"e *$:ee e76e3!e0 !"%3 ev%e9 $n0 9$%ve3 $n: 1'n!e3! !' *e 3'n$) 86 %30%1!%'n. 5 T"e *$ !%e3 "$ve n'! 0%31)'3e0/ $n0 !"e C'6 ! $n0 !"e Un%! $ e n'! $9$ e '(/ $n: '!"e 'n&'%n& 36**' ! ' 0e 3 9"%1" $((e1! !"e *$:' $n0 !"e 1"%)0( en) n$4e0 $5've. @ See 3e1!%'n 5?D.21C. En! : '( $n $0863!e0 'n&'%n& 36**' ! ' 0e %n I'9$ 9%)) n'! v%')$!e 2D USC 173D;.
*447805*
State of Iowa Courts Type: Case Number CDDM001353 MODIFIED SUPPORT ORDER Case Title JUDITH L NEVILLE VS DAVID GENE NEVILLE So Ordered
page 4 of 4
IN THE IOWA DISTRICT COURT FOR SAC COUNTY In Re the Marriage of Judith Nevi e and David Nevi e " CDDM##$%&% " " ORDER FOR RU(E !etitioner) " TO SHOW CAUSE " AND CONCERNIN* " DA'ID NE'I((E) " " Re+,ondent" .............................................................................. U!ON THE !ETITION OF JUDITH NE'I((E)
The a,, i/ation for a Ru e to Sho0 Cau+e /o1e+ 2efore thi+ Court- The Court ha+ e3a1ined the +a1e and find+ the +a1e +hou d 2e +et for hearing- It i+ therefore ordered that hearing on thi+ 1atter +ha 2e he d at the Sa/ Count4 Court Hou+e) Sa/ Cit4) Io0a) on the 56th da4 of Januar4) 5#$7) at $#"%# a-1IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Re+,ondent +ha 2e ,er+ona 4 +erved 0ith a /o,4 of thi+ order and that he +ha ,er+ona 4 a,,ear at the ti1e and , a/e ordered then and there to +ho0 /au+e 0h4 he +hou d not 2e he d in /onte1,t of thi+ Court and ,uni+hed a//ording 4-
State of Iowa Courts Type: Case Number CDDM001353 OTHER ORDER Case Title JUDITH L NEVILLE VS DAVID GENE NEVILLE So Ordered
page 2 of 2
IOWA DISTRICT COURT FOR SAC COUNTY In re: The marriage of Judith Neville U!on The "etition Of JUDIT$ N%&I''%( "etitioner( And Con/erning DA&ID N%&I''%( Re0!ondent) # # # # # # # # # # # David Neville
No) CDD*++,-.-
On thi0 date( the /a!tioned matter 1a0 0et for hearing to addre00 the "etitioner20 Rule to Sho1 Cau0e hearing) The "etitioner 1a0 !re0ent re!re0ented 34 her attorne4( Charle0 S/hulte) The Re0!ondent a!!eared 1ithout /oun0el) Re0!ondent 0tate0 to the Court that he 1a0 0erved 1ith noti/e of thi0 hearing at 5:,. !)m) on Frida4( Januar4 67( 6+,7) Additionall4( a /o!4 of the A!!li/ation 1a0 not atta/hed and gave the
Re0!ondent no noti/e a0 to the !ur!o0e of the hearing) The Re0!ondent ha0 a08ed for additional time) 9a0ed u!on the late noti/e and the inade:ua/4 of information( the Court determine0 that thi0 hearing 0hould 3e /ontinued) IT IS T$%R%FOR% ORD%R%D that hearing re0/heduled for February 10, 2014 at 11:00 a.m.
State of Iowa Courts Type: Case Number CDDM001353 OTHER ORDER Case Title JUDITH L NEVILLE VS DAVID GENE NEVILLE So Ordered
page 2 of 2
IN THE IOWA DISTRICT COURT FOR SAC COUNTY JUDITH LUCILLE NEVILLE STATE OF IOWA EX REL ,
The respondent has filed a Motion to Continue the contempt hearing set for February 10, 2014. The motion should be granted. IT IS, THEREFORE, THE ORDER OF THE COURT as follows: The Motion to Continue is granted. A Contempt Hearing is scheduled on 02/24/2014 at 1:00 PM at the Sac Co. Courthouse, 100 NW State St., Sac City, Iowa.
CLERK TO FURNISH COPIES TO: Attorneys of record and parties appearing pro se.
1 of 2
State of Iowa Courts Case Number CDDM001353 Type: Case Title JUDITH L NEVILLE VS DAVID GENE NEVILLE ORDER SETTING HEARING So Ordered
2 of 2
2RDM02 IN THE IOWA DISTRICT COURT FOR SAC COUNTY IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF JUDITH LUCILLE NEVILLE STATE OF IOWA EX REL AND DAVID GENE NEVILLE
UPON THE PETITION OF Case No. 02811 CDDM001353 JUDITH LUCILLE NEVILLE STATE OF IOWA EX REL ,
COURT REPORTER MEMORANDUM (The court reporter shall file this memorandum with the district court clerk.) Appearances: For Plaintiff/Petitioner: Charles Schulte For Defendant/Respondent: James Van Dyke Other: Information required by Iowa Rule of Civil Procedure 1.903(3): I, Tara Gibson, am providing the following information as required by Iowa Rule of Civil Procedure 1.903(3): 1. The type of proceeding that was reported: Contempt 2. The date(s) on which the proceeding occurred: February 24, 2014 3. The name of the court reporter who reported the proceeding: Tara Gibson 4. The name of the judge who presided over the proceeding: Gary McMinimee 5. The reporting fee for the proceeding: $40.00 6. We, the undersigned judge before whom the above-entitled case was tried, and the official court reporter who, by order of the Court, reported the same, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing
1 of 3
is the report of the whole proceedings upon the trial and/or hearing of the above-entitled cause made and taken pursuant to the order and direction of the Court, in accordance with Iowa Code Section 624.10. /s/Tara Gibson _________________________________________
2 of 3
State of Iowa Courts Case Number CDDM001353 Type: Case Title JUDITH L NEVILLE VS DAVID GENE NEVILLE COURT REPORTER MEMORANDUM AND CERTIFICATE So Ordered
3 of 3
Case No: 02811 CDDM001353 EXHIBIT LIST Contempt February 24, 2014 Presiding Judge: Gary McMinimee
The following exhibits were offered and admitted by the Court at the hearing as shown above:
Respondent's Exhibits 1. Incident report 2. Photograph 3. Photograph 4. Letter from Jennifer Neville
1 of 2
State of Iowa Courts Case Number CDDM001353 Type: Case Title JUDITH L NEVILLE VS DAVID GENE NEVILLE EXHIBIT LIST So Ordered
2 of 2
IOWA DISTRICT COURT FOR SAC COUNTY In Re the Marriage Of JUDITH NEVILLE and DAVID NEVILLE Up n The !etiti n Of JUDITH NEVILLE" !etiti ner" And C n#erning DAVID NEVILLE" Re$p ndent% A hearing was held on February 23, 2014, on Judiths January 13, 2014 Application for Rule to how !ause which alleged that "a#id was in conte$pt for failing to return the parties child Jennifer at the end of scheduled #isitation% A re#iew of the file indicates that the parties 2000 dissolution decree pro#ided that Judith was awarded physical care of the parties children and that "a#ids #isitation included alternating wee&ends 'fro$ Friday at ()30 p%$% until unday at ()30 p%$%* and, in odd+nu$bered years, included !hrist$as ,#e fro$ '-)00 p%$% on the day before the holiday with the children being returned at -)00 p%$% on the day of the holiday%* Recent litigation between the parties includes a finding of conte$pt and the dis$issal of a $odification proceeding% .n July 31, 2012, the !ourt ad/udicated "a#id in conte$pt for #iolating the custody and #isitation pro#isions of the decree and as punish$ent 'sentenced 0"a#id1 to ser#e se#en 234 days in the ac !ounty Jail, but since this is the first conte$ptuous incident &nown to this !ourt, the sentence will be suspended and $itti$us will not be issued unless there is further conte$ptuous actions engaged in by the Respondent%* Regarding "a#ids conduct the !ourt had found) 0"a#id1 states that he recei#ed a phone call fro$ his daughters on the e#ening of June 14, 2012, stating that they had wal&ed to a hotel and were calling hi$ to as& if he would co$e and pic& the$ up as they had had an argu$ent with 0Judith1% 5ithout contacting the 0Judith1, 0"a#id1 did as his daughters re6uested% 7e further states that he &ept 0!%8%1 for an e9tended period of ti$e because 0!%8%1, his 12+year old daughter, stated that she did not want to return to her $others care% :he parties daughter, 0J%8%1, testified that it was at her and her sisters re6uest that her father, 0"a#id1, got in#ol#ed, as he did not instigate NO% CDDM&&'()( ORDER
their lea#ing their $others care% :he !ourt concluded) :he !ourt concludes that 0"a#id1 acted irresponsibly in regard to the situation% 5hen he recei#ed a telephone call fro$ his daughters on the e#ening of June 14, he $ade no atte$pt to contact 0Judith1 to in6uire what was going on nor did he $a&e any atte$pt to persuade his daughters to return to their $others ho$e% 7e further showed irresponsibility when he allowed his 12+year old daughter to dictate when and where she would reside, contrary to the parties stipulated court+ordered decree% :his !ourt concludes that while 0"a#id1 would li&e to beg off any responsibility for this situation, it is clear that he did not act as a responsible parent% .n April 10, 2013, the !ourt denied "a#ids ;etition to <odify !ustody% "a#ids ;etition had, a$ong other things, alleged 'that the children ha#e a strong desire to change residence to li#e with their father* and 'that Judith 8e#ille has treated or $istreated the $inor children%* Regarding the relationship between Judith and the children, the !ourt noted) :he testi$ony of 0J%8%1 and 0!%8%1 clearly establishes confrontation with their $other% =t is disturbing to note that 0J%8%1 in particular refers to her $other as 'Judy* rather than '$o$* and offers the state$ent that Judy does not deser#e to be called $o$% % % % :he !ourt ac&nowledges the testi$ony of both 0J%8%1 and 0!%8%1 and their desire to li#e with their father% :he !ourt also finds that both girls are doing e9tre$ely well in school, are in#ol#ed in e9tra+curricular acti#ities in which they e9cel% % % % 0:1he !ourt has been faced with two teenage girls testifying in the for$ of 'co$plaints* about their $other and the rules and $anner in which she handles discipline% Judith 8e#ille as the $other offers e9planation and corrections in so$e of the interpretations of her daughters, all of which cannot strengthen the relationship of $other and daughters% Regarding "a#id, the !ourt indicated) :he !ourt belie#es "a#id 8e#ille has good intentions as it pertains to his daughters% % % % "a#ids re6uest for a change in physical care is based pri$arily on con#ersations with his daughters% 7e truly has a #ery li$ited personal &nowledge of the e#ents testified to by the girls% % % % :he pri$ary reason for "a#ids re6uest in these proceedings is based upon the re6uest of his daughters%
=n #iew of the testi$ony at the hearing on the pending conte$pt, it appears that neither of the parties has ta&en to heart the !ourts obser#ations in its opinion denying the $odification) 5hen children reach teenage years, it beco$es e9tre$ely i$portant for their best interest that their $other and father act responsibly and to &eep at the forefront what is in the best interest of their children% >nfortunately the 8e#illes ha#e been unable to ad/ust appropriately% :he testi$ony at the conte$pt hearing indicates that on Friday, "ece$ber 20, 2013, there was a physical altercation in#ol#ing Judith and Jennifer% Judith and Jennifer do not agree on what occurred %
1
dri#ing her #ehicle towards "a#ids ho$e rather than towards school% Judith testified that she had told J%8% that it was up to her whether she went to school that day or went early to her fathers for #isitation% Although Judith had ta&en J%8%s cell phone, she did not atte$pt to contact "a#id to tell hi$ of the altercation or that J%8% was dri#ing towards his ho$e% 5hen J%8% arri#ed, "a#id did not try to contact Judith but rather went with J%8% to the helby !ounty heriffs office% helby !ounty he had a s$all bruise on her an&le% "a#id was told by the helby !ounty Attorney that he could not $a&e the heriff too& J%8% to Judiths to pic& so$e heriff and?or the
decision as to whether J%8% returned ho$e and that that would need to be J%8%s decision% .n "ece$ber 23, 2013, the helby !ounty personal ite$s% Judith only let J%8% ta&e a few things stating that J%8% would be returning ho$e soon% J%8% re$ains at "a#ids% "a#id has at all rele#ant ti$es been aware that Judith wanted J%8% to return ho$e at the conclusion of #isitation and has ne#er sought to #isit with Judith regarding the e#ents of "ece$ber 20, 2013% J%8% has indicated that she would not feel safe in Judiths ho$e% :he !ourts of this state ha#e found non+custodial parents in conte$pt when they ha#e failed to return a child to the custodial parent at the conclusion of #isitation% ee, e%g%, Wells v. Wells, 1(- 8%5%2d @4, (4 2=owa 1A(A4 2'"efendants only apparent e9planation is the boys did not want to go with ;laintiff% :here is e#idence the $other, at least indirectly, contributed to the situation and in any e#ent did little or nothing to effect a
% =t does not appear that any action was ta&en by either as a result of their
correction%*4B Borland v. Iowa District Court, 34@ 8%5% 2d A( 2:able4, 2003 5%C% 4@@3(04 2'0Dorland1 testified he told his &ids that he couldnt be in#ol#ed in their decision% % % % =n effect, 0he1 has washed his hands of all responsibility for insuring that this !ourts order is co$plied with% % % % :he #ery thing that this !ourt has e#ery right, at a $ini$u$, to e9pect that 0he1 do e#erything in his power short of co$$itting a cri$e to insure that this !ourts orders are co$plied with and to obtain the childrens cooperation in that regard is the #ery thing that 0he1 has $ade it abundantly clear 0he1 does not do% % % % 07oneycut1 has pro#en, beyond a reasonable doubt and largely through 0Dorlands1 own words, that 0he1 has intentionally refused to e#en try to obtain his childrens cooperation % % % %, and, in this !ourts #iew, that is conte$pt%*4% Regarding the e#ents of "ece$ber 20, 2013, the court recogniEes that J%8% and Judith each ha#e a strong incenti#e to portray the$sel#es as the abused party% =t is unnecessary, howe#er, for this !ourt to $a&e any findings regarding the credibility of $other and?or daughter, or whether "a#id belie#ed that J%8% would be at ris& if she returned to Judiths ho$e% :he issue here is not whether J%8% would be in fact safe in Judiths ho$e, but whether "a#id willfully #iolated his obligation to return J%8% at the end of #isitation% "a#ids attorney during argu$ent i$plied that "a#ids conduct was not willful because he acted out of concern for J%8%s safety% 7ad he done so, there $ay ha#e been so$e 6uestion here as to the willfulness of his conduct% 7owe#er, the fact of the $atter is, "a#id did not testify that his reason for his not returning J%8% was that he reasonably feared for her safety in Judiths ho$e2% Rather "a#id testified that he left the decision whether to return to Judiths ho$e to J%8% and J%8% decided not to return, stating she feared for her safety in Judiths ho$e% :hat is e9actly what "a#id was not per$itted to do% Although a father can certainly act to protect his children, e#en in the face of a court order, if he reasonably belie#es a child is in danger, he is not free to abrogate the decision as what to do to a 13 year old daughter% Judith has established beyond reasonable doubt that "a#id is in conte$pt% ORDER IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED*
2 :hat $ay well be because there was no e#idence that he $ade any effort to tal& to Judith about what had happened nor was there
e#idence that he atte$pted to confir$ what J%8% told hi$% >n6uestioningly accepting what a 13 year old daughter says regarding her $others abusi#e conduct would li&ely not be considered reasonable%
'%
conte$pt he is sentenced to the ac !ounty /ail for se#en days% +% ta9ed to "a#id% Judith is awarded attorney fees in the su$ of F@00%00% !osts are
State of Iowa Courts Type: Case Number CDDM001353 OTHER ORDER Case Title JUDITH L NEVILLE VS DAVID GENE NEVILLE So Ordered
page 6 of 6