Raymond Alexander Verheydt v. Tammi Wai-Ping Verheydt

Summary

The Wyoming Supreme Court affirmed a divorce decree awarding child support arrearages and requiring the husband to pay a share of the children’s past and future activity expenses. The court held that the husband waived his due process and evidentiary-hearing claims by agreeing to proceed on the pleadings and counsels’ arguments without an evidentiary hearing and by failing to object.

Holdings

1. A party waives the right to assert a procedural due-process or evidentiary-hearing objection on appeal when the party expressly agrees to proceed without an evidentiary hearing, actively participates through counsel, and fails to object to the procedure before receiving an adverse ruling.
2. A party waives an objection to the statutory requirement that a child-support order be supported by financial affidavits or testimony when the party fails to file the required affidavit and agrees to have the court resolve the issues without testimony.
3. A party waives a challenge to the absence of findings required for a deviation from presumptive child support when the party asks the court to determine the allocation of child-related expenses, approves the proposed decree, and fails to object to the manner in which the court resolves the issue.
4. The district court's decree ordering Husband to pay $7,000 in additional child-support arrearages and half of the children's past and future activity expenses will be affirmed because Husband waived the procedural and statutory challenges raised on appeal.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Husband waived his due-process and evidentiary-support claims by expressly agreeing to proceed without an evidentiary hearing and failing to object.
2. Whether Husband waived his challenge under Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 20-2-308 to the child-support order because he did not file a financial affidavit and agreed to resolution without testimony.
3. Whether Husband waived his challenge under Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 20-2-307 to the district court's failure to make findings required for a deviation from presumptive child support.
4. Whether the district court abused its discretion in ordering $7,000 in child-support arrearages for the period Husband lived in the marital home and requiring him to pay half of the children's past and future activity expenses.

Disposition

affirmed