Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Matson v. Matson
Citations: 569 N.E.2d 732; 1991 Ind. App. LEXIS 613; 1991 WL 59802Docket: 05A02-9008-CV-464
Court: Indiana Court of Appeals; April 17, 1991; Indiana; State Appellate Court
Keith Matson appealed a trial court decision that denied him credit for an overpayment of child support, which the court characterized as a voluntary gift. The appellate court reversed this decision, determining that the overpayment was not voluntary. The appellee did not file a brief, allowing the court to reverse the trial court based on a prima facie showing of reversible error. The court referenced established legal principles, noting that child support payments cannot be retroactively applied to future obligations to maintain the regularity of support for children. The trial court had found that Matson overpaid due to a tax intercept payment and noted his history of child support arrears since the divorce in 1982. While he paid $8,923.17 in total, he would have owed $5,820.00 had he adhered to the court's order. Matson's earnings had been low, and he represented himself until the appeal. The trial court concluded that Matson's failure to seek reimbursement until a year after the tax intercept indicated a voluntary overpayment. The appellate court found that the delay did not constitute laches, as it did not involve inexcusable delay, implied waiver, or change in circumstances causing prejudice to the other party. The court emphasized that the tax intercept was initiated by an agency, not by Matson, who had no right to refuse the interception once the debt was validated. Federal law mandates that excess amounts withheld must be returned to the obligor. Consequently, the appellate court ruled that the overpayment from the tax intercept should not be deemed voluntary and remanded for a proper accounting of Matson's child support payments. The court concluded by reversing the trial court's decision.