From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Houchin v. Wood

Court of Appeals of Indiana
Oct 30, 1974
162 Ind. App. 76 (Ind. Ct. App. 1974)

Opinion

No. 1-474A75.

Filed October 30, 1974.

PROCEDURE — Request for Jury Trial. — Our Supreme Court held that the trial court was not bound to grant a jury trial to the defending party where his demand therefor was not filed within 10 days after the issues were first closed, whether closed by filing of a responsive pleading or by operation of law.

The sole issue in this appeal is whether the trial court erred in overruling defendant-appellant's request for a jury trial in a paternity action.

From the Lawrence Circuit Court, H. Wayne Baker, Judge.

Affirmed by the First District.

Rickard H. Crokin, of Indianapolis, for appellant.

Richard J. Wood, Mellen Mellen, of Bedford, for appellee.


The sole issue in this appeal is whether the trial court erred in overruling defendant-appellant's request for a jury trial in a paternity action.

We conclude that the jury request was not timely filed. Upon the authority of Buher v. Johnson (1973), 155 Ind. App. 693, 294 N.E.2d 625, the trial judge was correct in denying the request and we affirm.

After plaintiff-appellee filed her petition to establish paternity, appellant was served by warrant on April 25, 1972, and posted a recognizance bond on the same date. His trial counsel entered appearance on June 6, 1972, and on the following day filed an answer and request for jury trial. After three settings of the cause for trial by jury and subsequent continuances, plaintiff-appellee filed her motion to reset the trial by court. After a hearing the court held that the prior assignments for jury trial were improper and ruled that defendant's request for jury trial be denied. After trial without a jury, the court found that defendant was the father of the plaintiff's child, and ordered payment of support, medical and hospital bills, and attorney fees.

Ind. Rules of Procedure, Trial Rule 38(B), requires that a demand for jury trial be filed not later than ten [10] days after the first responsive pleading to the complaint "and if no responsive pleading is filed or required, within ten [10] days after the time such pleading otherwise would have been required."

TR. 6(C) requires that when a responsive pleading is necessary it must be filed within 20 days. In State ex rel. Beaven v. Marion Juvenile Ct. et al. (1962), 243 Ind. 209, 184 N.E.2d 20, our Supreme Court held that the trial court was not bound to grant a jury trial to the defending party where his demand therefor was not filed within 10 days after the issues were first closed, whether closed by filing of a responsive pleading or by operation of law.

In Roe v. Doe (1972), 154 Ind. App. 203, 289 N.E.2d 528, the court recognized that in paternity actions, the issues are deemed closed by operation of law.

Simple arithmetic informs us that the 20 days required by TR. 6(C) plus the 10 days allowed by TR. 38(B) equals 30 days as a maximum time within which a party in a paternity action may file a request for jury trial. The jury request in the case at bar was filed 43 days after defendant was notified of the pendency of the action. Under the above authorities, the request arrived too late and the trial court was correct in denying a jury trial. Buher v. Johnson, supra.

Judgment affirmed.

Robertson, P.J. and Lowdermilk, J., concur.

NOTE. — Reported at 317 N.E.2d 911.


Summaries of

Houchin v. Wood

Court of Appeals of Indiana
Oct 30, 1974
162 Ind. App. 76 (Ind. Ct. App. 1974)
Case details for

Houchin v. Wood

Case Details

Full title:PAUL WAYNE HOUCHIN v. JOAN WOOD BY DOROTHY MATTHEW, HER NEXT FRIEND

Court:Court of Appeals of Indiana

Date published: Oct 30, 1974

Citations

162 Ind. App. 76 (Ind. Ct. App. 1974)
317 N.E.2d 911

Citing Cases

Weber v. Costin

Because no new issues were raised against Costin, the amended complaint did not extend the time period in…

O.---- Q.---- v. L.---- R

" This court has recently held that paternity actions are civil in nature, Cohen v. Burns (1971), 149 Ind.…