Hackett v. Hackett, 2013 Ohio 4684

Married in 1992; two children: Cameron (1995) and Mallory (1998).
2004 dissolution decree; shared parenting; Appellee designated residential parent for school placement; Appellant owed $765 monthly child support.
2011 post-decree motion seeking medical/lump-sum relief, increased child support, proof of life insurance, and related relief.
2012 magistrate approved an increase to $1,274.24/month based on Appellant’s 2011 income; Appellant sought recalculation and deviation.
Dec. 19, 2012 and Jan. 15, 2013 judgments affirmed the magistrate’s decision; objections overruled; appeal followed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court erred by not detailing facts for obligor designation	Hackett argues the court failed to set forth specific facts.	Hackett contends the designation lacked necessary factual findings.	No plain error; designation affirmed.
Whether the court properly applied R.C. 3119.24 in deviation analysis	Hackett asserts statutory deviation requirements were not considered.	Hackett contends deviation not required since no deviation ordered.	Court did not abuse discretion; no deviation ordered.
Whether the court abused discretion by not granting downward deviation	Hackett seeks downward deviation under 3119.24/3119.23.	Hackett argues court should reduce guideline amount.	No abuse of discretion; downward deviation refused.
Whether income averaging should have been used under R.C. 3119.05(H)	Hackett asserts income averaging is appropriate.	Hackett contends averaging improper given employment history.	No error; court could refuse averaging.

Goldfuss v. Davidson, 79 Ohio St.3d 116 (Ohio 1997) (plain-error standard and the need for error objected to at trial)
Booth v. Booth, 44 Ohio St.3d 142 (Ohio 1989) (abuse of discretion standard in family-law decisions)
Pauly v. Pauly, 80 Ohio St.3d 386 (Ohio 1997) (statutory deviation discretion not automatic; extended parenting time discussed)