Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Parenting Plan Rule11 topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Judge Denies Nathaniel Warmbier's Motion to Set Aside Parenting-Plan Order; Finds Respondent Admitted Withholding Child Support
Summary
The court denied Nathaniel Warmbier's motion to set aside a May parenting-plan order and rejected his request for Rule 11 sanctions; the record includes on-the-record admissions that Warmbier was behind on child support and used payments as leverage.
A chancery judge denied Nathaniel Warmbier's motion to set aside an existing parenting-plan order and rejected his request for Rule 11 sanctions, finding the order accurately reflected statements made under oath at a May 28, 2025 hearing.
The judge said the record showed Warmbier, who appeared pro se, acknowledged under oath that he had failed to make timely child-support payments and had withheld funds as leverage. The court described statements on the record that the respondent "admitted under oath that he failed to make timely payments for his support obligation, and that he had the ability to make such payments, and withheld paying the funds to the petitioner in retaliation."
Plaintiff counsel asked the court to affirm the prior order, which included an attorney-fee judgment of $5,000 in favor of the petitioner for legal work performed; the judge upheld that judgment and denied Warmbier's motion as not well taken. The court also found any Rule 11 violation, if present, would be by Warmbier rather than counsel.
The judge directed counsel to prepare an order consistent with the ruling. The court additionally entered a show-cause notice for both parents based on their failure to produce proof of completion of a court-ordered parenting class; the judge said the absence of such proof would be considered in future litigation.
