Johnson v. Johnson
Antonyio Johnson, Plaintiff and Appellee
Madonna L. Johnson, Defendant and Appellant
Jessica Clayton, also known as Jessica
Johnson, through her Guardian ad Litem,
Lynn Kerbeshian; David Clayton, as the
natural father of Jessica Clayton a/k/a
Johnson; and Michelle Clayton as the
natural mother of Jessica Clayton
a/k/a Johnson, Third Party Defendants
Northeast Central Judicial District,
Grand Forks County
Judge Kirk Smith
|Nature of Action:||Child Cust & Support (Div.\other)|
|Term:||06/2002  Argument: 06/25/2002 9:30am|
|ND cite:||2002 ND 151|
652 N.W.2d 315
Listen to recording of oral argument in MP3 format
Appellant's Statement of the Issues:|
1.That it was clearly erroneous and/or an abuse of discretion for the court, in view of the fact that an equitable adoption of Jessica had taken place during the marriage of the parties, to fail to order the plaintiff to pay child support for Jessica for the period 01 January 1999 through July 2001, and to permit a below guideline payment for August and September 2001.
2. That it was clearly erroneous and/or an abuse of discretion for the court to fail to equitably divide the respective entitlement that each of the parties had to an interest in military retirement, in accordance with the "Bullock Formula".
3. That it was clearly erroneous for the court fail to award, or even reserve, temporary or permanent spousal support for Madonna Johnson.
4. That the District Court, in ruling on the procedural issues of the case, and the issues of child support, division of military retirement, and award or reservation of spousal support, displayed an unwillingness to recognize the decision of the Supreme Court in Johnson v. Johnson, 2000 ND 170, and exhibited bias toward Madonna and that, on remand, the case should be reassigned to another Judge.
Appellee's Statement of the Issues:
I. The trial court ruling, with respect to child support, should be upheld.
II. The trial court did not err in its decision to not allocate military retirement income among the parties.
III. The trial court's order regarding spousal support is not erroneous.
IV. Appellant's request for reassignment of judge upon remand.
|Add Docket 20010288 RSS|
|1||11/23/2001||NOTICE OF APPEAL: 11/19/2001|
|2||11/23/2001||ORDER FOR TRANSCRIPT: 11/19/2001|
|3||11/27/2001||Acknowledgement of Notice of Appeal & Order for Transcript from Audrey Timberman|
|4||12/17/2001||RECORD ON APPEAL (2 vols), Exhibits, & Trans. (1) (Not rec'd: #60--Return Receipt)|
|5||01/16/2002||TRANSCRIPT DATED October 3, 2001|
|6||01/16/2002||DISK - TRA of October 3, 2001 (Scanned)|
|7||01/16/2002||DISK NONCOMPLIANCE - TRA of Oct 3, 2001 (see ltr from Ms. Timberman dated 1-14-02)|
|8||02/27/2002||MOT. EXT/TIME APPELLANT BRIEF|
|9||02/27/2002||ACTION BY CLERK (MAT). Granted: 03/07/2002|
|12||03/11/2002||DISK - ATB (e-mailed)|
|13||04/05/2002||MOT. EXT/TIME APPELLEE BRIEF/Consent and Stipulation (Faxed)|
|14||04/05/2002||ACTION BY CHIEF DEPUTY CLERK (MAE). Granted: 05/07/2002|
|15||04/08/2002||Orig. Mot. Ext/Time Appellee Brief/Consent and Stipulation|
|17||05/08/2002||DISK - aeb|
|18||05/28/2002||Request for Radio/TV Coverage (AP) (e-mail from Dale Wetzel dated 5-26-02) (APPRVOED)|
|19||06/25/2002||APPEARANCES: Henry H. Howe; Steven J. Simonson|
|20||06/25/2002||ARGUED: Howe; Simonson (Vol. Y; Page 8)|
|21||06/25/2002||ORAL ARGUMENT WEBCAST|
|22||09/20/2002||DISPOSITION (and Remanded): AFFIRMED/PT, REVERSED/PT|
|23||09/20/2002||SPLIT OPINION: VandeWalle, Gerald W.|
|24||09/20/2002||(CONCUR and DISSENT): Sandstrom, Dale V.: CON/DIS|
|25||09/20/2003||At the direction of the Court there will be no costs taxed on this appeal|
|26||09/20/2002||Order/Judgment Mailed to Parties|
|28||10/17/2002||RECEIPT SIGNED BY DISTRICT COURT CLERK'S OFFICE|
|29||10/15/2007||EXPUNGED - Nonpermanent record items destroyed|