"

(n"V>"O~""'fI' O~.\.~ orthaA, I

.
~
\\oJ;, ~ '" 10M, ~ 0 •. :~,,-r c:>-~ ~\.\,,~ • ! riLED BY CLERk
"< .0

-~w\"'\'Goo.1 t\ \...d- 01'\. :~,\"3 \.,~O ~ KS, O1STRiCT CftlRT

TRtRO JU01:I~l OIST
~ 'Q:/.
a ~I ! ••t:"' r'. !.,.. -,. ,- Otr 29 9 37 All'91
\'\ ! . .

_" ,Iv
'~"1.1' ,'w:' .•••••.
v I",,; \.:., -

TN THE DISTRlCT COURT OF SHAWNEE COUNTY. KANSAS

DIVISION TWELVE

In the Mattcr of the Mamage of

HALLECK RlCHARDSON

and

CLAUDfNE DOMBROWSKI Case No 96.0-217

JOURNAL ENTRY OF DiVORCE

Ths matter was tried to the Coun on Septembel; 18 and 19, 1997 and taken under

advisement. The Coun deems that thc case is now fully submitted and after considering the

testimony and evidence presented at trial as weU as the repom from social services providers

specifically Dr Joel Nance, Dr Richard Maxfield, guardian ad litem Scott McKenzie, the letter

of Jenny Shaw, the home visitation repon of Shana O'Neil, COUltservices officer, transcripts of

hearings before Judge 6euenberger, the Coult has reached the foUowing findings and conclusions

This couple was married on tbe 22nd of November. 1995 and separated on

February 5, 1996 This divorce case was filed on March 4, 1996 The parties are the parents of

one child. RikkJ Alexandra Dombrowski, born on December 12, 1994

2 The Coun finds that the parties are incompatible and Ihal a divorce should be

granted

1 PROPERTY DIVISION Each party should be awarded all personal property

currently in their possession and all personal property owned by them at the time of the mamage
4
MI Richardson is involved," a Chapter 7 banletUptcy and makes a monthly payment of S3 t per

month on his debts Ms Dombrowslu 's involved also in a bankruptcy case and make a $75 per

month payment The Coun would order that each partY should conclude their bankruptcy

obligations and pay all debts they have IOcurted since the date of separation. Respondent IS

awarded her KPERS account

There are sevenlltems of personal property whicb are in dispute Neither pany h2.S

established by a preponderance of the evidence what would constitute the value of this property

how or when it was acquired 11 has been established. however. that Ms. Dombrowski lef\ the

marriage with only a suitcase and a few personal effects.

In November or December \994. Mr. Richardson purchased a home. At that time the

pallies were living together but were not married. Mr. Richardson testified he has executed a

contract of sale of this property for $18.950. There is a mongage balance of between $49.000

and S50,OOO In addinon to the mortgage, there is an IRS lien against the propeny which Mr.

Richardson testified was approximately $4.800. After deducting these items and the SI0.000
•
down payment which Mr. Richardson made with funds he acquired prior to cohabitation or

marriage, the Coun concludes that there is an equity in this property of approximately $9.000.

The Coun would order that Mr Richardson pay to Ms. Dombrowslu the sum of $4,500 upon the

c1oslOBof Ihe sale of tlus propenY In the event that the sale does not close, the Coun will

Impose a judicial tien ,n favor ClaudIne Dombrowski of 54.500 on the panies' real estate to carry

IOteresr at 7 So;. per annum from November 1. 1991 Based upon the weight or the e",dence In

this case. It is the Court's conclUSIon that the $4,500 cash payment from the sale of the resIdence

2
 is-.al1equitable apponlOnmem ofpropeny 10 Ms Dombrowski for all clalms she may llave for her

mlerest in mantal propeny In Ihe event of closing this sale before January I, 1998, Mr

RJchardson ,s 10 pay [0 Ms Dombrowski al c10sangor aftcr Ms Dombrowslu has relocated 10

Topeka. wluchever occurs last

4 MAINTENANCE The (oun finds Ihat maintenance should nOI be awarded Ul (hIS

casc.

5. CUSTODY Each parry requests the Coun to award them custody ofthe rrunor

child. Temporary custody and visitation of the minor child has been fiercely Iingated in this casc

* and has been the subject of several hearingS before Judge Leuenberger

At the Dial of this case, considerable time was spent proving that this couple has had a

violent domestic relationship and that on at least one occasion Ms. Dombrowslci suffered .triou.

injury at the bands of Mr. Richardson although the panics cannot agrec on exactly when, where

or how this injury was inflicted. There is no evidence that either pan has physically hanned Rikki

-j5? F~om the evidence it appean to the Coun that the violence in this couple's relationship

.
comes from both directiOns, neither is totally blameless. Mr. RJchardson, being male, is stronger

and therefore able to inflict greater physical injury on Ms. Dombrowski than she on him, however,

-f the Coun finds that ~. DOmbrowski:as initiated and g!OVQ5Q some of the violent conta:t~~

RJchardson has been convicted of domestic banery and at least one alcohol related offense

Funher, '" the context of a custody decision, it is clell that neither parcnt at this timc has the

lL capacity 10 co-parem or 10 suppon the other parent's lOVIngrelallonsllJp WIth [helTdaughter

x,.\.O::i"'4. oc~., Murual parental Involvemcnt with llus cluld has been made worse by Ms Dombrowslu's
••'''''t-tb •.•
~.\~ '
~llIlatcraJ deci<jgn 10 move to Lamed, Kansas an May of 1926 Thc distance berween Topeka and
v-o/ {\ovJ\.\' - ~'"
 /

Lsrn makes it virtually impossiblet~an individuallreater 10 wor\( with the family; for Mr.
ed

-1,I.'",.b.~~
,
Richardson 10 have regular and frequenl contact wilh this child; 10 establish any reasonable

,b.,.~, " •• , ,,~1.,;.,d." ~",l1o,~ •• m~' 'omT,p'"'' I,m.'

due to lhe proximiry of th anles as lessened the physical ,,;olence. It has. however, done
•

"Z violence to the relallonship of RJkJti and her father. If long dislance visitation is continued. onthe

\ Court'S
•..===---view. wiU take its toll not only on RiIW but each of the parties The Court specifically

finds that separation of the child from either parent for long periods of time is hatmful for a child

of about three y~ of age.

The Court believes that it is faced with choosing betWeen twO alternatives. The first is to

place custody in one or the other lhe parents and continue a long distanCC visitation arrangement

The second choice is to require Ms. Dombrowski to return to Shawnee Count)' with RiIcki and
uent
establish and a strUctured custody and visitation program so that Rikki may enjoy frett and

regular contact with bolh parents

Ms. Dombrowski requests the Court 10 give her residential CIISlodyin Pawnee Rock.

Kansas and visitation be ordered to take place in Wichita under supervised conditions This plan
•
would curtail Mr. Richardson's access to Rildci even more than it currently is. further, the Court

-
finds that there is no evidence which would support a court order for supervised visitation. While

it is obvious that supervision is needed when the parties exchange custody of die child because of

the polential for violence between the parties. evidence is lacking Ihat Mr Richardson does not

---------------- .
.adequalely care for and protect the child Mr Richardson has been previously married. To that

marriage were born lhree children From the evidence available 10 the Court. there i51\0 basis to
•
suppon that Mr Richardson has mistreated any ofllis children in any way.

4
•

Th~ CSO, Sherr! Kel!$r, luis llad more contact With this couple and observed their

interactions more than any of the mental health professionalS that have offered optnions In the

Court'S view, her recommen<.\ationto place custody III Ml RIchardson carnes great ",eigln Also

weighing heavily in cruscase IS the fact that Ms DombroW51u has been the pnmar)' caretaker of

the child The Court is always heSItant to change custody from a pnmatY caretaker
n
(t is my condusion that the best Interest of the lWdci is for her to reside in a locauo

where both parentS have access to her. Further, the Court is ordering joint custody in this case as

4t am concerned thSustod~ther parent wi1l result in manipulation and abuse of their

position as sole custodian to harm the relationship of 1lilOOand the other parent. The Court

enters the foUowing specific orders relating to custody of the child:

A. The Court awards loint custody of the parties' minor child with temporary

residential placement with the mother Ms Dombrowski is ordered to relocate with the child in

Shawnee County, Kan!as, on or before January 1, 1998. l.n the event Ms. Oambro\llslci and the

child are not residing in Shawnee County on January I, 1998.@cust

Od
Y shall be ordered in w.r..4ti::
•
Rich~n.~ •
B. Shawnee County Court Services is appointed case manager to assist the parties in
01
developing a plan for residential custody and visitation pursuant to K SA. 23-10 et seq a.f\er

January I, 1998. The Court is reserving the question of shared custody or appointing a residential

parent for after January I, \ 998, at this time l.n the event that the parties are unable to a'!fee on

residenual custody and visitation after relocation to Topeka, the C oun will make a determination

shortly after January \, 1998 or upon motion of eIther party If I1l1p~sseis reached pnor to that

time The patties are prospectivelY ad\llsed that ils custody decIsion WIllbe uUluenced by

£XH lillHl ..A'"

 eVIdence on the willmsness and ability of each paren! to respect and appreciate the bond between

the child and Ihe other parent Each parent should endeavor during the next 60 days to

ocmonmate a capac,l)' 10 allow and foster a contlnumg relalionship between the child and the

other parent
AI, soon after Ihc lUst of the year as can be arranged, rhe couple shall conwlt
\>. \.~ c ,I

1~~~5
~ c...\~~
1 \ ~
~th Dr RIchard Maxficld for the purpose of re-evaluating the pames' circumstances and 10

o•...
., ~:"O
~:~:&. make reconunendations regarding therapy for the parties and for a post-divorce co-parenting
. Ill-: "'.'"
"';,.'.' ~ov~_'ol'"
..7•••"'. "'cY' process.
t-~\ r;c>.
"/ (~ D All exchanges of Rikki shall occur at the YMCA Safe Visit location under tbeir
l?

-----
supervision
E The CoW1 orders thar neither party shall remove Rlkki from Pawnee County or

Shawnee Counl)' except for direct :ransportation between Topeka and Pawnee Rock.

, Specifically, this order means neither party shall take this child overnight to any location other

roval of t~ case manager. Disr ard oftJ1isorder wiD Iibly

result in a change of custody

•
The COW1orders Ihe parties to work out petitioner's visitation in case
F

management through December. 1997 wherein tbe petitioner will have Rikki approximately one

week per month All other orders and admonitions included in the May 28. 1991 order of Judge

Leuenberger nOI in conflict wilh this order shall remain in full force and effect

~r
~ G - Mr Richardson shall not consume alcoholic beverages while RJIW
J-
15 in his cl'stody

or for four hours prior

H
10 piclung her up for VlS1tatJon~

Both parnes are directed

ff
10
-
complete anger management classes
•
./ ...•..~ ~.
Y ~ 6 £X~HlBn "A"
-<"
 During visitation WIth'peulIOner, lhe pelitigner will assIst Rikki in initiating a

telephone call 10 respondent eVtrf 48 hours at Sp m BemQndMt 1$ enjoined frgm ca!!ing

pelitioner's home ex 10 case of a bQJlA5de emerQencv Further, respondent is directed to not

ceol
call law enforcemenl authOrlll 10 IOvesuga,e lhe peuuoner wilhout first consulting with the case
es
manager Failure to comply with tNS prOVISIonWIllresult in alteration of the Vlsltalion schedule

6. The Court has evaluated Ms Dombrowski's assertIon Ihat her move 10 Larned (\0 ",,"p..s, f'.
0

was necessitated due to the closure of Topeka Slate Hospital No evtdence was presented ••.••
.:l~c.\•••.••.
v;o\~
I:: ••.•vy

regarding her effort to find employmenllocally The .f0urt has taken notice lhat the Topeka

Daily Capitol newspaper each weekend advertises from six 10 ten available positions for LPNs in
---'---=----_-:..-:..._----------_._-_.- --"-------
Topeka or surrounding counties including the Topeka Correctional facility The Court concludes

"'"0-...•.....•
-'f(i'
- - ",,'
7 •Who> ~ ,h'
_''"f
p""~hod "" ",' •
fo' "" •• ~-~,

.m.d
L~~
A<m" '''' ,h' "'. ~
"""""

named Rikki Alexandra Dombrowski. Petitioner, Mr Richardson, requests that the Court order

that the child's name be changed to Richardson The Kansas Court of Appeals recently ruled /"

Re: Marriage of Killman, 23 tun. App 2d 975 that a trial court in a domestic relations action has
e
jurisdiction and the statUtory authonty to change the name of a child of Ihe mamag which is

being dissolved
'-~~ l1< Coo" "" "'" i'• i• .,100' ~,"'" "" ~""'" •• "". m. '''''. of

)vW-' Richardson.
. The Court has made Ihe dec:s\on
. that Rjkkl
.' should have Ihe benefit of twO iliVo\ved

------
parents The struggle between RJk1o'Sparents is s.gTlllicaJ\1and Ihe animosirl caused by her

sumame can be easily eliminated Since Rikki WIllbe parented by both parents, there wiU be less

confusion ifher father's's surnarne is included the Court nOles lhal Ms Dombrowski did not

7
 change
. .
her name al the lime of mamage and Iherefore wiU pemut her to elecl whether or not

Rikki's surname shall be changed 10 Richardson or Dombrowslu-Richardson. Attached to tlus

order, the Coun IS furruslung forms for counsel 10 complete to effectuale the name change. The

parties arc direcled to complete these forms and schedule and appointment wilh this Coun 10

execute same Wllhin ;0 days trom Ihe date of tlus order

8
.
The respondent's request for past maintenance IS denied as the Coun is without

jurisdiction to grant same. See In Re: Marriage of Brown, 247 !Un. 152, 164 and K.5.A. 60-

161O(bX2). ~espondent's request for retroactive reimbursement of milease reimburtement and

medical expenses is also denied. Judge Leuenberger's order establishing child support and

structured visitation cannot be retroactively modified 10 increase Mr. Richardson's liability. See

In Re: Marriage of Blagg, 13 Kan App 2d 5JO Insofar as furure travel expenses are concerned,

the Coon finds that this cost should be borne by Ms. Dombrowski. It was she who removed

herself to Larned. KanSas,. Tlus uruJaterai decision should not impose a greater expense on Mr .
•
Richardson. Finally, the Coun denies respondent's motion for reuoactive child suppo~. The

statute cited by counsel K.S.A. 38-1 121{e) is applicable 10 paternity cases. The Court does enter
•
judgment for all unpaid lemporary child support ordered in tbis case.

9 For Ihe months of November and December, 1997, the Court orders child suppon

in tbe amount of SJ I0 per month to be paid by the petilioner to the respondent in accordance with

Ihe anached worksheet. The respondent shall provide health insurance and any uninsured health

care costs will be divtded equally The Coun will recalculate child suppon in cOMection WIth its

custody order or upon mOllon of either party If there is a change in circumstances Respondent

shall chum RikJo as her dependent for ,nco me tax PUflloses rn odd numbered years aM petItioner

8
sllall claim her in even numbered y.ears
10. In respondent'S closing argument, the claim IS made for S602 representing medical
W3
bills of petitioner's cluldrcn from Ius first mamage that were "charged" to Ms Dombro ki The

Courl is uncenain whether or notlhese expenscs were paid by Ms Dombrows\u'S Insurance or

her personally Assummg these expenses were paid by Insurance, the request th'll she be

personally reimbursed for them is dcrued In the evcnt that Ms Dombrowski is claiming that she

personally has paid medical bills for Mr RJchardson' s cluldren, the Court would direct that these

bills and her evidence of payment be itemized so that the Court may make a detennination on

whether or not a reimbursement should be made as a maner of equity.

11. The resmUning order previously entered in tlus case is extended for a period of one

12, Each parry shall pay thetr own attorneys fees. Coun com are assessed against the

petitioner.

IT IS SO ORDERED
ty'
ENTERED thisaf(:: day of October. 1997. at Topeka, Kansas
•
•

Copies to:
Don Hoffman
Ainka Kweli .. }.
"

Harry Moore
Sheni Keller
Scon McKenzie