Summary
The Louisiana appellate court affirmed an increase in monthly child support from $900 to $2,000. The court held that the evidence supported a substantial change in circumstances based on the father’s increased income and the child’s increased expenses, and it upheld the deviation from the statutory guideline maximum. The court also declined to impose sanctions for a frivolous appeal.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the loss of part of the hearing transcript required a new trial or otherwise prevented appellate review.
- Whether the trial court erred by finding a change in circumstances sufficient to justify increasing child support above the statutory guideline maximum.
- Whether the appellee was entitled to sanctions and damages for allegedly frivolous appellate conduct.
Holdings
- The missing portion of the transcript did not require a new trial because the appellate court had ordered the parties to submit a narrative statement and, when they could not agree, properly obtained a narrative from the trial judge.
- The trial court did not abuse its discretion by increasing child support to $2,000 per month, including an amount above the statutory guideline maximum, because the record supported a significant increase in the father's income and in the child's expenses.
- Sanctions and damages were not appropriate because the record did not prove the appellant's alleged dilatory conduct or deficient briefing.
Key quotations
“After our review of the evidence, we find that the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in increasing the child support, considering the significant increases in both defendant’s income and John’s expenses.” (810)
“Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is hereby affirmed. Costs of appeal are to be paid by defendant.” (810)
Factual background
The parties' child-support obligation had increased from $600 per month in 1987 to $900 per month by agreement in 1991. By the time of trial, the child's expenses had increased substantially as he grew older, changed schools, and participated in more activities, while the mother's income remained relatively stable. The father's income and financial resources had increased substantially, including income from his medical practice, hospital work, rental property, and a professional medical corporation. The trial court increased support to $2,000 per month, above the statutory guideline maximum.
Procedural history
Michele Ritter petitioned to increase child support and modify visitation based on changed circumstances. After a hearing officer recommended an increase, the trial court entered an interim order and later rendered judgment increasing support to $2,000 per month. When part of the hearing transcript was lost, the appellate court ordered a narrative statement; the parties could not agree, and the trial judge supplied the narrative. The court of appeal affirmed the judgment and denied the request for sanctions.