Summary
The Alaska Supreme Court considers whether a parent with shared physical custody of children from a prior marriage may deduct both actual child support payments and a hypothetical support amount when calculating support for another child. The court holds that Alaska Civil Rule 90.3(a)(1)(C) permits deduction only of the amount of prior-child support actually paid, and that a concurrent deduction under subsection (D) is not permitted in these circumstances. The court affirms the superior court's child-support calculation.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether Alaska Civil Rule 90.3 permits a parent who makes child-support payments for children from a prior relationship under subsection (a)(1)(C) to also claim the hypothetical deduction under subsection (a)(1)(D) for those same children.
- Whether the superior court correctly calculated Gorton's child-support obligation by deducting only the amount of child support actually paid for his children from the prior marriage.
Holdings
- A parent may not claim both deductions for the same children. When the parent pays child support under a shared-custody arrangement, the parent is entitled to deduct the amount of support actually paid under subsection (C), but not an additional hypothetical deduction under subsection (D).
- The superior court correctly allowed Gorton to deduct only the $5,756.88 in child support actually paid for his two older children and correctly rejected the additional 27% hypothetical deduction.
Key quotations
“We affirm the superior court's decision that Jeffrey was only entitled to deduct from his adjusted income the amount of child support actually paid for the children from his prior marriage under Alaska Civil Rule 90.8(a)(1)(C).” (81)
“Allowing Jeffrey to deduct the hypothetical 27% he would have paid to support his older children if they lived full time with him would artificially inflate the deduction for his child care expenses and would fail to take into account the savings in the support he provides to his children that result from Shannon's own contribution to the children's support.” (84)
Factual background
Jeffrey Gorton and Stephanie Mann share physical custody of their son Mason, with Gorton caring for Mason approximately 36% of the year because of his work schedule. Gorton also shares 50-50 custody of two children from a prior marriage and pays $5,756.88 annually in child support for them. In calculating support for Mason, Gorton sought both a deduction for the support actually paid for the older children and a hypothetical 27% income deduction based on the cost of caring for them full time.
Procedural history
After the superior court awarded Jeffrey Gorton and Stephanie Mann shared physical custody of their son, Mason, it calculated Gorton's child-support obligation. The court allowed Gorton to deduct the child support he actually paid for two children from a prior marriage but rejected his proposed additional hypothetical deduction based on the cost of supporting those children if they lived with him full time. The superior court ordered Gorton to pay $631.64 per month, denied reconsideration, and Gorton appealed.