Narrative Opinion Summary
In a dispute over child support obligations, the North Dakota Supreme Court reviewed an appeal by the Bismarck Regional Child Support Enforcement Unit against John Schumacher. The original 1993 divorce judgment mandated escalating child support payments, which were adjusted following a review of Schumacher's financial situation. The RCSEU proposed a reduction in payments and contested the abatement during summer visitation. The district court upheld a referee's recommendation to reduce Schumacher's child support obligations, factoring in medical expense deductions. On appeal, the Supreme Court affirmed the deduction of medical expenses as permissible under N.D. Admin. Code § 75-02-04.1-01(7)(e) due to Schumacher's unopposed testimony regarding payments. However, the court reversed the abatement of child support during summer visitation, citing a lack of specific findings to justify deviation from guidelines prohibiting such abatement. The decision was remanded for further proceedings to address these issues. The court emphasized the necessity of determining net income in accordance with state guidelines and applied the 'clearly erroneous' standard in reviewing factual findings. The judgment was affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded, with all justices concurring.
Legal Issues Addressed
Abatement of Child Support During Summer Visitationsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: Child support cannot be abated during periods when the child is with the non-custodial parent unless specific findings justify a deviation from the guidelines.
Reasoning: The child support guidelines explicitly prohibit abatement during periods when the child is with the non-custodial parent. Although the referee acknowledged this prohibition, he cited a hardship provision without clarifying whether he was invoking the rebuttal provision.
Deduction of Medical Expenses in Child Support Calculationssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: Medical expenses can be deducted from the obligor's income if payments are made for the children's medical bills, even in the absence of documentation, provided testimony is unopposed.
Reasoning: Under N.D. Admin. Code § 75-02-04.1-01(7)(e), a deduction for medical expenses is permissible if payments are made for the children. RCSEU argues that Schumacher lacked documentation for his claims, but his testimony indicated he paid approximately $200 monthly for the children's medical bills, with no opposing evidence presented.
Determination of Child Support Obligationssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The determination of the obligor's net income is essential for calculating appropriate child support, and this must adhere to the guidelines set forth in North Dakota law.
Reasoning: The Supreme Court affirmed part of the district court's decision but reversed and remanded in part, emphasizing that the determination of the obligor's net income is crucial for calculating appropriate child support, following the guidelines set forth in North Dakota law.
Review of Findings of Fact under 'Clearly Erroneous' Standardsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: Findings of fact are subject to review under the 'clearly erroneous' standard, allowing for reversal if the court is left with a firm conviction that a mistake has been made.
Reasoning: The court noted that findings of fact are reviewed under a 'clearly erroneous' standard, meaning that if the court is left with a firm conviction that a mistake was made, it can overturn the findings.