Nancy M. Green v. Daniel H. Green (2012)

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION

BACKGROUND

The parties were divorced on November 14, 2006 after a 17–year marriage.   At that time the parties signed a separation agreement providing, in relevant part, that defendant would pay child support at the rate of $295 per week for his three minor children pursuant to the Connecticut Child Support Guidelines (CSG).  Defendant paid that support until the oldest child reached the age of 18, which was on June 20, 2008.   He then reduced the amount of child support for his two remaining minor children to $264.25.

MOTIONS AND ISSUES

The following motions were presented to the court when the parties appeared before the court on February 8, 2012:

1. Plaintiff's postjudgment motion for modification of child support (# 121, dated November 7, 2011) alleging a substantial change in circumstances as a result of an increase in defendant's income, and

2. Plaintiff's postjudgment motion for contempt (# 123, dated November 23, 2011) alleging that defendant violated the orders of the court when he reduced his child support payments without court order once the oldest child turned age 18.   She therefore claims a child support arrearage owed to her of $5,504.25.   Plaintiff has abandoned her claim to unpaid alimony.

FACTS AND FINDINGS

Both parties agree that there is a substantial change in their financial circumstances which warrant a change in child support.   Both parties currently earn more than they did at the time of the last child support order, and one of the children is no longer a minor.   It is therefore found that there has been a substantial change in the circumstances of the parties.

Defendant currently earns $2,038.50 gross and $1,408.89 net per week from his full-time employment as an engineer.

Plaintiff's earnings are not as easily defined.   Her financial affidavit and tax returns show gross earnings of approximately $12,000 per year.   She works for the accounting firm of Joseph C. Bissonnette & Co., LLC as a tax preparer.   Plaintiff claims that this employment is seasonal, and the only evidence of her earnings with that company were from February 6, 2011 to April 27, 2011.   Her gross earnings, however, for that 11–week period of time were $6,933.96.   That would leave the additional 41 weeks for plaintiff to gross approximately $5,000 in earnings.

Plaintiff also works nine to nine and a half hours per week at a local restaurant.   She claims to gross approximately $84 per week (which would approximate $4,400 per year).   Whereas that income would seemingly make up the grand total claimed by plaintiff on her tax returns, plaintiff acknowledges that she has the ability to work full-time but offers no reason for her failure to do so.

In addition, plaintiff claims to have income from her fiancé, who rents an apartment from her.   Against the $184.62 gross rental income per week, plaintiff claims to have expenses of $143.85.   There is no written lease and no evidence of the stated expenses.

Plaintiff's testimony regarding her income and her stated expenses is not based upon credible evidence.   She is either understating her income or she is not working to her full capacity.

The parties have asked the court to choose between four CSGs, each with a different financial scenario.   That which is the most financially accurate guideline is marked as Plaintiff's Exhibit B. The presumptive amount of support to be paid by defendant for the two minor children is computed to be $300 per week, together with 59% of the unreimbursed medical expenses.

Defendant changed the amount of child support he was paying to plaintiff, pursuant the oral agreement of the parties, when the oldest child turned 18.   Defendant paid the amount of $264.25 from that date to the present time, approximately three and a half years before plaintiff filed her motion for contempt.

Whereas the courts do not favor the unilateral changing of court orders, it is found that defendant acted in good faith upon the oral agreement of the parties and conducted himself in the furtherance of that agreement.

ORDERS

This Court has specifically considered the relevant statutory provisions and case law affecting the issues in this case as well as the testimony and evidence presented by the parties.

The court enters the following orders:

1. Plaintiff's motion for modification (# 121) is hereby granted.   Defendant is ordered to pay child support to plaintiff, in accordance with the Connecticut Child Support Guidelines referenced as plaintiff's Exhibit B, in the amount of $300 per week, together with 59% of the unreimbursed medical expenses.   This order shall be retroactive to the date motion # 121 was served upon defendant.   The parties are to compute the arrearage, which amount shall be paid to plaintiff within 30 days of this order.

2. Plaintiff's motion for contempt (# 123) is hereby denied.

RESHA, SJ

Resha, Robert T., S.J.