155 A.3d 422
Me.2017Background
- Steven M. Dunwoody and Janice W. Dunwoody divorced in 2001; court issued multiple child support orders as incomes changed.
- Steven is disabled and receives disability benefits; the children received dependent disability payments based on his disability.
- At times the dependent payments exceeded the court-ordered support; at other times they were insufficient, producing a cumulative deficiency of $21,978.
- Both parties assumed Steven need not make direct payments because the children received the dependent benefits.
- Janice sought child support enforcement and the Department issued a notice of debt; Steven moved to modify support and sought a declaration that he owed no arrearages, asserting statutory credits and equitable defenses (laches, waiver, equitable estoppel).
- The magistrate granted the modification but found no basis to cancel arrears; the District Court adopted that decision and this appeal followed.
Issues
| Issue | Dunwoody's Argument | Janice's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether excess dependent disability payments can be credited against arrearages | Excess payments should be credited against past arrears (claimed $33,000 excess) | Statute disallows crediting any excess against past or future obligations | No credit allowed; arrearage of $21,978 stands |
| Whether laches bars collection of child support arrears | Laches should prevent enforcement due to delay and circumstances | Laches inapplicable to child support collection | Laches does not apply to child support arrears |
| Whether waiver prevents collection of arrears | Parties’ mutual assumption that benefits discharged obligations amounted to waiver | No voluntary, knowing relinquishment by Janice shown | No waiver; mutual misunderstanding insufficient |
| Whether equitable estoppel prevents collection | Janice’s conduct/silence led Steven to rely and change position | No misrepresentation or detrimental reliance shown | No equitable estoppel; defendant may collect arrears |
Key Cases Cited
- Dep’t of Health & Human Servs. v. Pelletier, 964 A.2d 630 (Me. 2009) (defines equitable estoppel and standards of review for equitable defenses)
- McCarthy v. Goroshin, 143 A.3d 138 (Me. 2016) (definition and review standards for waiver)
- Brochu v. McLeod, 148 A.3d 1220 (Me. 2016) (held laches does not apply to collection of child support arrearages)