Caron v. Caron
2017 Ohio 1070
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Amanda and Joshua Caron married in 2005, had one child (2009), and divorced following competing complaints; a magistrate granted divorce, divided assets/liabilities, named Joshua residential parent and legal custodian, and ordered Amanda to pay child support (magistrate decision Dec. 2015; trial court overruled Amanda’s objections July 2016).
- Amanda challenged custody, alleging Joshua abused alcohol and drugs, was unstable, and had other misconduct (including taking the child on an unscheduled day); witnesses testified to nightclub drug/alcohol activity.
- The magistrate and trial court found the credibility of Amanda’s witnesses lacking, found no credible evidence Joshua’s substance use adversely affected the child, and designated Joshua as the more stable parent.
- Amanda reduced her dental-hygienist hours (from ~32 to ~25/week) to gain time with children; the trial court found her voluntarily underemployed, imputed income based on 32 hours, but granted a 30% downward deviation for her substantial parenting time.
- Amanda purchased a Texas house pre-marriage; both parties made post‑marriage improvements, commingled funds, rented the property after leaving Texas, and the trial court treated the appreciation as active marital property and awarded Joshua one-half of the marital equity (adjusted for depreciation benefits taken during marriage).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether designating Joshua residential parent/legal custodian was against the manifest weight of the evidence | Amanda: trial court ignored evidence of Joshua’s alcohol/drug abuse, instability, domestic violence, and unilateral school enrollment; she offers more stability | Joshua: evidence of substance abuse/domestic violence lacked credibility; he is more settled (home, employment flexibility, base medical access), and child is doing well in his school | Court: affirmed — no abuse of discretion; magistrate/trial court credibility findings upheld and designation was in child’s best interest |
| Whether trial court erred in discrediting evidence of Joshua’s alcohol/drug abuse | Amanda: witnesses and nightclub observations showed drug/alcohol abuse | Joshua: denied abuse; negative employment drug tests; missed hair-follicle test due to surgery; GAL did not find credible evidence | Court: affirmed — no credible/substantial evidence of abuse impacting the child; credibility determinations supported |
| Whether Amanda was voluntarily underemployed and whether child‑support deviation was improper | Amanda: reduced hours to spend time with child and aid child’s needs; change was reasonable and in child’s interest | Joshua: reduction was voluntary and hours were available; impute income under R.C. factors | Court: affirmed — finding of voluntary underemployment not an abuse of discretion; imputed income on 32‑hour week; 30% deviation was properly applied to account for parenting time |
| Whether Texas residence appreciation was marital (subject to division) | Amanda: house bought pre-marriage with separate funds; post‑marriage improvements paid with her separate funds, so appreciation should be separate | Joshua: post‑marriage improvements, mortgage payments, joint accounts, sweat equity, and rental income during marriage produced active appreciation | Court: affirmed — appreciation was active and marital; trial court properly awarded half the marital equity (adjusted for depreciation benefits) |
Key Cases Cited
- Robinson v. Robinson, 168 Ohio App.3d 476 (Ohio Ct. App.) (imputation of income and voluntary underemployment principles referenced)