This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.
Facts
The case involves a dispute between a mother and father regarding the modification of child support payments and related issues. The parents, who divorced in 1988, share joint custody of their child. The father initially paid $332.50 per month in child support, which he later voluntarily increased to $500. In 1992, the mother petitioned for a modification of child support, citing changes in circumstances, including the father's income and the custody arrangement. The father had visitation with the child for more than 30% of the time, which raised questions about the appropriate child support calculation method under New Mexico's Child Support Guidelines (paras 1, 3-4).
Procedural History
- District Court, April 13, 1994: The trial court modified child support, using Worksheet A of the New Mexico Child Support Guidelines, and ordered the father to pay $692 per month starting in April 1994. The court declined to retroactively increase child support to the date of the petition filing and directed each party to bear their own attorney fees (paras 1, 4).
Parties' Submissions
- Appellant (Mother): Argued that the trial court erred by (1) failing to retroactively increase child support to the date of the petition filing, (2) using Worksheet A instead of Worksheet B to calculate child support, and (3) requiring each party to bear their own attorney fees. She contended that Worksheet B was mandatory because the father had visitation with the child for more than 30% of the time (paras 1, 6).
- Respondent (Father): Asserted that the trial court correctly used Worksheet A and argued that if Worksheet B were applied, the court should impute income to the mother based on evidence of her earnings and business activities. He also supported the trial court's decision not to retroactively increase child support and to deny attorney fees to the mother (paras 8-9).
Legal Issues
- Whether the trial court erred in using Worksheet A instead of Worksheet B to calculate child support.
- Whether the trial court erred in refusing to retroactively increase child support to the date of the petition filing.
- Whether the trial court erred in requiring each party to bear their own attorney fees.
Disposition
- The Court of Appeals vacated the trial court's order and remanded the case for further proceedings, including recalculating child support using Worksheet B, determining the mother's income, and reconsidering the retroactive modification of child support and attorney fees (paras 2, 9-14).
Reasons
Per Pickard J. (Bosson and Bustamante JJ. concurring):
- The court held that the trial court erred in using Worksheet A instead of Worksheet B because the father had visitation with the child for more than 30% of the time. The clear language of the New Mexico Child Support Guidelines required the use of Worksheet B in such circumstances, and the trial court did not make findings to justify deviating from the guidelines (paras 6-7).
- The court noted that the trial court failed to determine the mother's income, which was necessary for calculating child support under Worksheet B. Evidence suggested that the mother may have had income from her business, and the trial court should address this issue on remand (paras 8-9).
- Regarding retroactive modification of child support, the court emphasized that the general rule is to apply modifications from the date of the petition filing unless unusual circumstances justify a different approach. The trial court should reconsider this issue and provide findings if it departs from the general rule (para 10).
- On the issue of attorney fees, the court stated that the trial court should consider factors such as economic disparity, the complexity of the case, and the parties' ability to pay. The trial court's decision to deny attorney fees should be revisited in light of the recalculated child support and other findings on remand (paras 11-13).