Ruling: College-aged Girl Will Stop Receiving Financial Support from Adopted Father

In a reported decision April 13, the three-judge Appellate Division panel in Llewelyn v. Shewchuk agreed that an adoptive father no longer has to pay child support for his college-age daughter who chose to live with her biological father.

According to James Shewchuk, his 20-year-old daughter, Adrianna Shewchuk, voluntarily removed herself from his care and that of her mother, and he believes that he should no longer be required to even partially be responsible for her financial care.

Appellate Division Judge Garry Rothstadt, along with Judges Marie Lihotz and Marianne Espinosa, agreed with Camden County Superior Court Judge Kathleen Delaney decision to grant James Shewchuk’s motion to have Adrianna Shewchuk declared emancipated.

Adrianna Shewchuk was born to Lisa Llewelyn and a former husband, who was not identified in the appeals court’s opinion, in 1992. Llewelyn and James Shewchuk were married in 1994, and he adopted Adrianna that same year.

Llewelyn and James Shewchuk divorced in 2002, and they agreed to joint custody with James Shewchuk agreeing to make child support payments and help pay for Adrianna Shewchuk’s college expenses, according to the opinion.

The adoptive father filed a motion to be relieved of his obligations in April 2013 after learning that Adrianna Shewchuk, who graduated from high school in 2011, had moved out of her mother’s house and was living with her biological father and his wife, and was no longer attending school. His ex-wife eventually supported his motion.

Adrianna Shewchuk, in response, confirmed her new living arrangement, but produced records that showed that she was attending a local community college.

She also presented proof that she was working at a donut shop, but only earning $7.75 an hour, insisting that she could not support herself and still needed the support she had been receiving from James Shewchuk.

Adrianna Shewchuk did admit, however, that her biological father’s wife was paying a large portion of her college fees.

In ruling in favor of emancipation, Delaney relied on a 1997 Appellate Division ruling, Filippone v. Lee. In that case, a child had left the mother’s home and was being cared for by “other people.” That court concluded that “by her own choosing, she … moved beyond the sphere of influence and responsibility exercised by her parents, and she is now independent of her parents.”

Adrianna Shewchuk argued that even though she voluntarily moved in with her biological father and his wife, she still requires the financial support of her adoptive father because she is a student and her biological father’s wife is under no legal obligation to help her.

“Appellant has presented no legal authority directly on point to support her claim she is not emancipated under these circumstances,” Rothstadt said.

On appeal, Adrianna Shewchuk cited a 1998 Chancery Division ruling, L.D. v. K.D., where a judge refused to emancipate a special-needs girl who, with the consent of the mother, moved into an apartment with roommates so she could finish her studies in the same school district.

“We find appellant’s situation to be extremely different,” Rothstadt said. “Although she provided information about her treatment for depression and anxiety, there was no evidence her issues interfered with her ability to be independent.

“It is undisputed she voluntarily left her mother’s home at the age of 20 to live with her biological father,” Rothstadt said. “She simply withdrew from her parents’ supervision and control, obtained part-time employment, sporadically attended school and arranged for her support in reliance upon the financial relationship she entered into with her biological father and his wife.”

Amanda Trigg, a lawyer who focuses her practice on family law and who was not involved in this case, said the court’s ruling was a logical one.

“She is an adult who is being held accountable for the decisions she made,” said Trigg, of Lesnevich & Marzano-Lesnevich in Hackensack. “If an adult child moves out of the house and all they want is the parent’s money, it’s hard to hold the parent responsible for that.”

Trigg said cases such as this point to the need for legislators, parents and the matrimonial bar to discuss changes that need to be made in the law to address changes in society.

“There has to be a conversation about emancipation,” she said.
James Shewchuk’s attorney, Blackwood solo Maury Cutler, said both courts were correct in their rulings.

“Adrianna, on her own, voluntarily left her mother and reunited with her biological father, whom she hadn’t seen in 18 years,” Cutler said. “Once a child has left the parents’ sphere of influence, she is no longer dependent.”