Debra Tardiff v. Roger Plourde (2010)

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION

The parties were married on July 18, 1992 and divorced on March 19, 2009.   They had one child issue of the marriage, Amanda Plourde, born on January 5, 1993.   Amanda is seventeen years of age.   She will be going into her senior year of high school in a month or so, and will reach her eighteenth birthday in January 2011.

At the time of dissolution the parties had what was essentially a shared parenting plan alternating parenting weeks with Amanda.   The parties live (and still do) within a mile or two of each other and Amanda had liberal access to both parents.   The Court awarded child support of $91 per week to the plaintiff, recognizing that the plaintiff took the primary role in taking the child to doctors, school activities and the like.   The plaintiff continues to spend substantially more than the defendant for Amanda, including her automobile expenses, insurance, upkeep, dance lessons, and clothing.

As of February 2010, Amanda opted to spend much of her time with her father because she found it easier than packing and unpacking clothing and personal belongings between houses.   There is no estrangement with her mother and usually she visits the plaintiff three evenings a week.

This claimed change in circumstances is the ground for the defendant's motion to modify custody and child support orders in place.  (Motion # 145.)

The Court denies said motion finding it would be inequitable under the facts of this case.

The plaintiff has always been the main provider for Amanda's needs and she continues to do so.   The major expense of maintaining her automobile, insuring it, providing fuel, etc., have not decreased.   She has also incurred unnecessary medical expenses for Amanda because the defendant failed to notify her that he found a job which provided such insurance, and further he is in arrears on the relatively modest child support order in existence.   About the only new expense now to the defendant is a small increase for food.   Amanda can freely move between homes and given the loose parenting arrangements, these minor food costs do not warrant a reduction in support.

The motion to modify custody, parenting plan and support is denied.

The defendant's motion for order (to become an active participant in the sale of the marital home) is denied.   The parties agreed to reduce the listing price to $198,000.   The listing real estate broker testified that she had shown it seventy to eighty times and she is actively trying to sell it (she has 27 years of experience in the field).

The plaintiff has filed a motion for contempt for the defendant's arrearage in child support for his failure to pay his share of Amanda's extra-curricular activities and unreimbursed medical expenses.   He has also failed to pay his credit card loan as ordered and has failed to transfer 50% of the Capital One credit card balance as ordered.

These arrearages total $11,735.96.   The defendant is ordered to pay $35.00 per week against said arrearage (the amounts are subject to correction).

The financial orders of child support and arrearage payments are to be enforced by an immediate wage withholding order.

Any arrearage remaining at the time of sale of the former marital home shall be paid in full for the defendant's share of the proceeds from the sale.

Klaczak, J.T.R.

Klaczak, Lawrence C., J.T.R.