Bass v. Bass
2011 Ark. App. 753
Ark. Ct. App.2011Background
- Divorce decree and contempt order from Hot Spring County Circuit Court involving Betty Bass and Keith Bass.
- Betty Bass adopted two special-needs foster children, A.B. and C.B., with significant developmental needs requiring substantial care.
- Children receive state adoption subsidies and survivor benefits; these subsidies/benefits were argued to offset child-support obligations.
- The trial court awarded custody to Betty with shared/limited visitation for Keith and ordered a specific but unusual transfer of funds: $150/mo to Betty and $150/mo as alimony.
- Evidence showed Betty could not maintain employment due to caregiving duties for the children; Keith’s income was found to be $2758/mo and Betty’s $1743/mo, including the government benefits.
- On appeal, Betty challenged the child-support calculation under Administrative Order No. 10 and Keith’s contempt finding for withholding visitation, while the court’s order on child support was remanded for further AO10-consistent findings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the court properly applied AO10 to child support. | Bass asserts chart amount not stated and deviation unsupported by findings. | Bass contends chart amount should be offset by subsidies; deviation justified by needs of special-needs children. | Remanded for AO10-compliant findings; chart amount should be stated and justified. |
| Whether the contempt finding was proper and the sentence lawful. | Bass argues improper due process, indefinite suspended sentence, and unclear contempt type. | Bass acknowledges some conduct but disputes the form and scope of punishment. | Contempt affirmed as to finding; sentence narrowed to time served; remanded for AO10-compliant child-support findings. |
Key Cases Cited
- Stevenson v. Stevenson, 2011 Ark.App. 552 (Ark. App. 2011) (de novo review of child-support issues; abuse of discretion standard applies to factual findings)
- Black v. Black, 306 Ark. 209 (Ark. 1991) (chart amount presumed appropriate; need written deviation findings)
- Lee v. Lee, 95 Ark.App. 69 (Ark. App. 2006) (moral duty to support child; government benefits not earned by parent)
- Alcorn v. Alcorn, 183 Ark. 342 (Ark. 1931) (necessities to be provided despite child’s property)
- Kilman v. Kennard, 2011 Ark. App. 454 (Ark. App. 2011) (contempt standard; must be definite and attributable to willful disobedience)
- Henry v. Eberhard, 309 Ark. 336 (Ark. 1992) (indefinite suspension of contempt sentence improper)
- Applegate v. Applegate, 101 Ark.App. 289 (Ark. App. 2008) (civil vs. criminal contempt distinction; time-for-time served principle)