Dauer v. Dauer

Summary

The Ohio Sixth District Court of Appeals affirmed the denial of Matthew J. Dauer’s request to modify his child support obligation. The court held that although the recalculated guideline amount differed by more than 10 percent, the change was contemplated when the parties agreed to an upward deviation and the original deviation factors remained applicable. The court deemed the challenge to inclusion of capital gains moot and concluded that excluding the gains would not affect the 10 percent threshold determination.

Holdings

1. When a parent voluntarily agreed to pay child support above the statutory guideline amount, R.C. 3119.79(A) and (C) must be read together. A more-than-10-percent difference triggers consideration of modification but does not itself require modification; the parent must also establish a substantial change of circumstances that was not contemplated when the original order was issued. Because father knew his farming income varied substantially and the original reasons for the upward deviation remained unchanged, he failed to establish the required basis for modification.
2. The challenge to inclusion of capital gains was moot because the first assignment of error independently resolved the appeal. Even assuming capital gains should not have been included, the resulting income would still have produced more than a 10-percent difference from the existing support obligation, so the calculation would not alter the modification analysis.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the trial court abused its discretion by refusing to modify the agreed upward deviation in father's child support obligation after recalculation produced an amount more than 10 percent lower than the existing order.
2. Whether the trial court erred by including father's capital gains in calculating his income for child support purposes.

Disposition

affirmed