OLMSTEAD V. ZIEGLER
42 P.3d 1102 (2002)
NATURE OF THE CASE: Olmstead (F) appealed a decision that denied modification of child
support.
FACTS: F and Ziegler (M) were married in August 1989. Their only child, Lauren, was born
in January 1990. They divorced in December 1994. Both are attorneys. F agreed to pay for
their daughter's daycare and education expenses. Their daughter no longer requires constant
daycare, and she now attends public schools. Olmstead estimates that he spends approximately
$80 per month on child care. At the time of the divorce, F earned $53,000 and M earned
$16,753 in 1994. M was subsequently hired as an attorney with the firm of Baxter, Bruce &
Brand in Juneau, where her annual income increased significantly. In 1998, she earned
$53,761. F's law partner was tired of F playing cards on the computer and left the
partnership. F's income decreased significantly during this period. In 1996 his income
dropped to $10,157. In 1998 he earned $13,075. F decided to become a teacher. F moved the
court to modify child support. The trial denied the motion. The trial court found that the
parties still possessed equal earning capacities. The trial court also reasoned that F has
elected to learn new things for a while, and perhaps take on a new career. He is free to do
so, but under our case law M and the child are not expected to finance these choices.
ISSUE:
RULE OF LAW:
HOLDING AND DECISION:
LEGAL ANALYSIS:
Get
free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online
for 2-3 days and free samples
of all kinds of products.
for 2-3 days and free samples of all kinds of products.
https://bsmsphd.com
© 2007-2016 Abn Study Partner
No comments:
Post a Comment