Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

In re Marriage of Tanner

Court of Appeals of Oregon

July 11, 2018

In the Matter of the Marriage of Daniel J. TANNER, Petitioner-Respondent, and Adele M. TANNER, nka Adele M. Walter, Respondent-Appellant.

          Argued and submitted December 11, 2017

          Lane County Circuit Court 15DR09673; Mustafa T. Kasubhai, Judge.

          George W. Kelly argued the cause and fled the briefs for appellant.

          Adam C. Shelton argued the cause for respondent. Also on the brief was Arnold Law.

          Before Armstrong, Presiding Judge, and Tookey, Judge, and Shorr, Judge.

         Case Summary:

         Wife appeals from a judgment of dissolution, raising several assignments of error. She contends, among other arguments, that the trial court erred in the calculation of husband's income for purposes of child support, by not basing husband's support obligation on husband's actual income as reflected in his tax returns. Held: For purposes of calculating child support, OAR 137-050-0715 requires a determination of each parent's "actual" income. The trial court erred in not considering husband's actual income in calculating husband's income for purposes of child support but instead finding his income based on husband's expert's assumption of a reasonable salary for a person in husband's position.

         Award of child support reversed and remanded for reconsideration; otherwise affirmed.

         [292 Or.App. 767] TOOKEY, J.

         Wife appeals from a judgment of dissolution, raising several assignments of error. We write only to set forth our conclusion that the trial court erred in determining husband's income for purposes of child support. We reverse that portion of the judgment and remand for reconsideration of the award of child support only, and otherwise affirm.

         The parties were married for six years and have three daughters, ages five, three, and one. Husband is the owner of a business that he started before the marriage and that grew significantly during the marriage. Husband's income is a monthly draw from the business that varies from month to month. Husband's expert testified that husband has no "fixed" income and that reasonable annual compensation from the business for an individual in husband's position would be $300, 000. Based on that hypothetical compensation and some additional investment income, on his Uniform Support Affidavit, husband reported a monthly income from all sources of $27, 368.92. Husband's proposed findings stated that husband's monthly income was $39, 868.[1]However, state and federal income tax filings for husband suggest a much higher income. Wife's proposed findings stated that husband's monthly income was $160, 995, based on an estimated annual income from the business of approximately $2, 000, 000. The trial court adopted husband's proposed income figure without explanation and set child support accordingly.

         On appeal, wife contends that, for purposes of child support, husband's income is to be determined under the Child Support Guidelines, ORS 25.270, which require consideration of husband's income from all sources, and that the trial court erred in not basing child support on husband's actual income as reflected in his tax returns. We review the trial court's determination of husband's child support obligation under the child support guidelines for legal error. Carleton and Carleton, 275 Or.App. 860, 861, 366 P.3d 365 (2015).

         [292 Or.App. 768] For purposes of calculating child support, OAR 137-050-0710 requires a determination of each parent's income, as provided in ORS 137-050-0715. OAR 137-050-0715, in turn, defines "income" as follows:

"(1) 'Income' means the actual or potential gross income of a parent as determined in this rule. Actual and potential income may be combined when a parent has actual income and is unemployed or ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.