Boyer v. Hacker
2014 Ohio 760
Ohio Ct. App.2014Background
- Hacker and Boyer are the parents of two minor children; Boyer is the designated residential parent and they never married.
- Boyer has always claimed the tax exemptions for both children on her taxes.
- On December 12, 2012, Hacker moved to claim at least one child; the hearing was limited by an agreed visitation schedule.
- The trial court awarded Boyer the tax exemptions for both children, citing Hacker's $15,000 federal tax lien and a small arrearage in child support.
- Hacker appealed claiming the trial court failed to consider all RC 3119.82 factors; the appellate court affirmed the ruling as not an abuse of discretion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court abused its discretion in allocating the exemptions. | Hacker argues the court ignored net tax savings and best interests. | Boyer contends the best interests standard and child support status support keeping exemptions with her. | No abuse; exemptions stay with Boyer. |
Key Cases Cited
- Rainey v. Rainey, 2011-Ohio-4343 (12th Dist. Clermont No. CA2012-10-083) (abuse-of-discretion standard with RC 3119.82 factors guiding task)
- Ornelas v. Ornelas, 2012-Ohio-4106 (12th Dist. Warren No. CA2011-08-094) (presumption favors residential parent; may shift if best interests and current support status)
- Meassick v. Meassick, 2006-Ohio-6245 (7th Dist.) (burden on nonresidential parent to show best interests in exemptions allocation)
- Corwin v. Corwin, 2013-Ohio-3996 (12th Dist. Warren Nos. CA2013-01-005, CA2013-02-012) (no automatic entitlement to exemptions for the advantaged party; must show best interest)