The Court of Appeal gave clear direction today on how to determine child support for a self employed payor. Here’s the Court’s finding:

“…we are of the opinion that in order to properly determine the
income of a self-employed child-support payor, a trial court must first consider the past two
years of tax returns, and quarterly estimates for the current year, allowing depreciation as a
deduction if it reflects the actual decrease in value of an asset. Then, if the trial court believes
that the tax returns are unreliable, the trial court must make specific findings to support that
determination. After doing so, the trial court can then proceed to determine a child-support
payor’s income by using a net worth method.”

Here’s the link…
Wright v. Wright

Note: I’m a little concerned about the word “unreliable” in this opinion. Almost sounds like you have to show that the tax return was somehow prepared improperly. I think what the court is intending to say is that if the court does not believe the tax returns are providing a true indication of the payor’s income then the court can look to other evidence.

Parents agreed to hold child back in kindergarten. Child turns 18 during her junior year in high school. At the end of the child’s junior year, payor parent stops paying child support, holding the position that the child “should have” graduated that year. Under the Arkansas statute in effect at the time, a payor is liable for child support until the child turns 18 “or should have graduated from high school, whichever occurs later.”

The Court of Appeals upheld the trial court’s decision that child support in this case should be paid until the child graduates. The reason being that the parties had agreed to hold the child back in kindergarten, so the child was going to graduate at the time that she should.

Had there been no such agreement then it appears the payor father may have had the winning argument.

Here’s the link…
Barker v. Barker Avery

Practice note: Here’s how A.C.A. 9-14-237(a)(1) now reads:

A.C.A. 9-14-237
(a)(1) Unless a court order for child support specifically extends child support after these circumstances, an obligor’s duty to pay child support for a child shall automatically terminate by operation of law:

(A)(i) When the child reaches eighteen (18) years of age unless the child is still attending high school.

(ii) If the child is still attending high school, upon the child’s high school graduation or the end of the school year after the child reaches nineteen (19) years of age, whichever is earlier;

(B) When the child:

(i) Is emancipated by a court of competent jurisdiction;

(ii) Marries; or

(iii) Dies;

(C) Upon the marriage of the parents of the child to each other; or

(D) Upon the entry of a final decree of adoption or an interlocutory decree of adoption that has become final under § 9-9-201 et seq. and thereby relieves the obligor of all parental rights and responsibilities.

We had previously posted that the Court of Appeals decided that a trial court had authority to place child support arrearage money into an account for a minor child. Well, today the Supreme Court overturned the Court of Appeals. So it appears that a trial court does not have the authority to order child support arrearage funds to be placed into a separate account for the child, as opposed to paying the funds directly to the custodial parent.

Here’s the link…
Gilbow v. Travis

Yes, that’s correct. Noncustodial parent is disabled and receives SSDI. His children also receive SSDI payments due to his disability. These payments go directly from the Social Security Administration to the custodial parent for the benefit of the children. The Supreme Court of Arkansas has determined that these payments are to be considered income to the noncustodial parent for purposes of determining a net income for child support purposes.

Here’s the link…
Arkansas Child Support Enforcement v. Jason Hearst

The Arkansas Court of Appeals upholds a trial judge’s decision to place $38,000 of child support arrearage money into an account for the children instead of paying it directly to the custodial parent. The account is in the name of the custodial parent, but withdrawals can only be made by order of the circuit court.

The court cited several reasons for upholding the trial judge’s decision, including the fact that the custodial parent failed to show that the children’s needs were not met during the time the arrearage accrued (or that the custodial parent incurred added debt, etc. because child support was not being paid), and also the fact that the custodial parent had a “history of making unsound financial decisions.”

Here’s the link…
http://courts.arkansas.gov/court_opinions/coa/2009a/20090408/unpublished/ca08-600.pdf

Administrative Order No. 10 probably provides more Arkansas child support law than any other single document. Therefore there’s no better place to start if you have questions about Arkansas child support, how its calculated, what you can deduct, etc. Here’s the link to Administrative Order No. 10… http://courts.state.ar.us/pdf/admin_order10.pdf

BAH, or the housing allowance provided by the military, is included as income for purposes of determining the appropriate child support amount in Arkansas. Not necessarily a new development but something that definitely needs to be kept in mind.

Here’s a link to the case…
http://courts.arkansas.gov/court_opinions/coa/2009a/20090218/unpublished/ca08-679.pdf

Hiring a lawyer is one of the most important decisions you will ever make. Bonnie Robertson has some excellent advice for selecting the right one - and what to watch for as your case proceeds.

Tip #1
You have the right to know everything about your case. When you hire a lawyer, you have the right to expect a copy of every letter, every motion, and every document regarding your case that leaves your lawyer’s office. If you are receiving anything less, you lawyer is not living up to his or her obligation to communicate with you openly about your case…

Here’s the link for the rest of Bonnie’s tips…
http://www.robertson-law-firm.com/CM/Custom/What-Your-Lawyer-Doesn-t-Want.asp

(Note: Kevin Hickey represented the appellant mother in this case at trial and on appeal.)

In this case, the parties divorced while a medical malpractice lawsuit was pending with husband as the plaintiff. Mother received custody of the two children. Subsequent to the divorce, ex-husband settled the lawsuit. Ex-wife then petitioned the court to receive a lump sum payment of child support based on the settlement money received by ex-husband. The trial court held that the lump sum net amount received by the ex-husband was technically “income” under the Arkansas child support guidelines. A one-time lump sum child support amount of $52,500.00 was assessed. Ex-husband appealed and the Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court’s decision.

Here’s the decision…
http://courts.arkansas.gov/court_opinions/coa/2008b/20080917/published/ca08-117.pdf

Hiring an attorney can be about as enjoyable as going to the dentist. Here are some tips to ease the pain:
· Ask those you trust about attorneys they know.
· Make sure the attorney has experience in your type of case. If you are divorcing, do not hire an attorney that only handles personal injury cases, and vice versa.
· Ask the attorney about legal fees and costs of the case. Yes, they are two different things. Fees are what will be paid to the attorney for his time. Costs are expenses for your case – court fees, subpoena fees, court reporter costs for depositions, copies, postage, etc.
· Ask the attorney questions. Does he understand what you want to accomplish? Follow your intuition – if you do not like his answers, then you will probably not like his services.