J

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF MARYLAND FOR ANNE ARUNDEL COUNTY

JUDITH C. CHAMBERLAIN

*
*
*

Plaintiff

v.

STEPHEN D. CHAMBERLAIN

*
*

,_ ,""-

....Lt.I
,,_
..,.,;:,_
::::
-:
i

......

,.1
.I

Defendant

******************************************************************************
COMPLAINT TO ENFORCE MARITAL SETTLEMENT
AGREEMENT AND CONSENT ORDER OF AUGUST 31. 2011
ANDFORDECLARATORYJUDGMEN T

C)

..:::r

aI..J./

<:;::::,

CASE NO. 02-C-09-139690

Comes now the Plaintiff, Judith C. Chamberlain, by by and through her attorney, Samuel
J. Brown, and for her Complaint to Enforce Marital Settlement Agreement and Consent Order of
August 31 2011, and for Declaratory Judgment states as follows:
1.

The parties were divorced on May 22, 2009, by the Circuit Court for Anne

Arundel County.
2.

The parties have three children born as a result of their prior marriage, two of

whom are now emancipated by age, and their youngest child, John Stephen Chamberlain, born
will be beginning college in the fall of 2014.
3.

The Plaintiff and the minor child reside in Alabama. The Defendant has refused

to disclose his residential address to the Plaintiff and her counsel. THIS IS FALSE
4.

That on or about November 24, 2008, the parties entered into a Marital Settlement

Agreement which, in paragraph 8, states that the Defendant "shall pay the costs of tuition, room
and board, books, registration fees and reasonable application fees incident to providing each [of
!ILLMAN BROWN & DARROW, P.A.
Attomeys-at-1..ft

Poat Office Box 888

Annapolis, Maryland 21404-0668
(410) 263-3131

the parties' children] with an undergraduate college education for four consecutive years of
college."

(410) 269-5555
(301) 858-5500

SJB:MBW:jam:mbw/16308A/2013448/091313

5.

The Agreement goes on to provide that "The selection of which college or

university each child shall attend shall be made by Husband [Defendant], Wife [Plaintiff] and the
child, prior to the application and prior to enrollment."
6.

Furthermore, the parties entered into a Consent Order entered on or about August

31, 2011, which explicitly provides, "Defendant acknowledges and agrees that he shall continue
to be responsible for payment of the undergraduate college expenses as set forth in the Marital
Settlement Agreement ..." SEE PARAGRAPH 5 ABOVE
7.

The Plaintiff has made repeated attempts to communicate with the Defendant

regarding John's application to college, but as of the date of the filing of this Complaint, the
matter remains unresolved and early action deadlines are set for early October, with the first
deadline for Georgia Tech coming due on October 15, 2013.
8.

To Plaintiffs information and belief, pursuant to the language of the Marital

Settlement Agreement, John cannot even apply to colleges to determine whether or not he
qualifies for scholarships or other forms of non-loan based aid without an agreement from the
Defendant.
9.

After multiple attempts to resolve this issue, both by the Plaintiff and John

directly, the Defendant initially responded that he would only agree to John applying to Auburn
University where he would qualify for in-state tuition.THIS IS FALSE
10.

This would limit John to applying to only one college, which is clearly not

standard practice and not within the contemplation of the parties' Agreement. THIS IS FALSE
11.

The Defendant has now represented that he will only agree to John applying to the

University of Alabama or Auburn University, once again prohibiting John from even applying to
any out-of-state schools. THIS IS FALSE
12.

John would like to apply to Georgia Tech and Virginia Tech. He has worked very

hard to maintain a solid GPA and has done well on his placement exams. As a result, if he is
accepted, he may qualify for scholarships that would defray the total cost of tuition.
Additionally, both Georgia Tech and Virginia Tech provide in-state tuition options, should John
be able to establish residency in either state. JOHN ASKED TO APPLY TO AUBURN
13. Both older children were permitted to accept an out-of-state tuition option for
higher education. In regard to the oldest child, Defendant paid out-of-state tuition at the
University of Alabama for four consecutive semesters, before she established in-state residency.

,-

\,

In regard to the middle child, Defendant permitted her to apply to the University of Alabama
prior to her obtaining in-state residency, foreseeing out-of-state tuition costs. Plaintiff changed
residency to the state of Alabama in 2009 prior to the middle child's enrollment, allowing both
older children to receive in-state tuition after that date.
14.

The Defendant's current insistence that John be limited to applying to the

University of Alabama or Auburn University, despite the fact that the parties' older children were
allowed to apply to or attend the University of Alabama when they were not residents of that
state, is contrary to the parties' Marital Settlement Agreement and August 31, 2011, Consent
Order.
15.

The Plaintiff has made numerous attempts to resolve this issue, both directly with

the Defendant and through counsel. As a result, she has incurred attorney's fees and will
continue to incur fees pending a ruling by the Court.
16.

Neither the Marital Settlement Agreement nor the Consent Order of August 31,

2011, provide any limitation in in-state versus out-of-state tuition status or the amount of the
Defendant's obligation to contribute to said expenses. MSA REQ. AGREEMENT ON SCHOOL
17.
Furthermore, the Defendant's refusal to provide the Plaintiff with information
regarding, at the very least, the state in which he currently resides, has prohibited John from
looking into other potential schools where he may currently qualify for in-state tuition status.
18.

Pursuant to Section 3-401, et seq., of the Courts and Judicial Proceedings Articles,

Plaintiff requests that this Court issue a declaratory determination on an expedited basis
regarding John's ability to apply to any colleges in addition to the University of Alabama and
Auburn University.
19.

The Plaintiff further requests that this Court enforce the provisions of the parties' Marital
Settlement Agreement and August 31, 2011, Consent Order regarding college expenses.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests this Honorable Court to:
a.

Set this matter in for an expedited hearing on Plaintiffs Request for Declaratory

Relief to occur prior to October 15, 2013.

b.

Order that the minor child may apply to the schools of his choice in order to

determine whether or not he qualifies for admission and may be entitled to any scholarships.
c.

Award Plaintiff attorney's fees and Court costs for having to pursue this matter.