2023 Ohio 1567
Ohio Ct. App.2023Background
- Parents (mother and father) have two children: B.M. (b.2018) and T.M. (b.2019). An administrative child-support order (Mar. 22, 2021) set father as payor.
- Mother filed to adopt and modify the administrative support order, alleging father’s income was higher than recorded.
- At the May 9, 2022 hearing the parties stipulated on the record that mother would claim both children for 2021 and, beginning in 2022, father would claim B.M. and mother would claim T.M. as dependents.
- The magistrate imputed higher income to father, increased his child-support obligation, and ordered that mother be designated to claim both children under R.C. 3119.82, citing a custodial-parent presumption.
- Father objected, citing the on-the-record stipulation; the trial court overruled the objection, adopted the magistrate’s decision, and father appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court erred in refusing to follow the parties' stipulation about which parent may claim the children as federal tax dependents when modifying child support. | Father: The on-the-record stipulation controls and the court must designate parents per the parties' agreement under R.C. 3119.82. | Mother/Trial court: Custodial-parent presumption applies; father failed to rebut it with evidence, so court could designate mother. | Court held the statute mandates honoring a parties' agreement; trial court abused its discretion by disregarding the stipulation. Reversed in part and remanded for entry consistent with the stipulation (father to claim B.M. beginning 2022). |
Key Cases Cited
- Morrow v. Becker, 3 N.E.3d 144 (Ohio 2013) (child-support matters reviewed for abuse of discretion)
- Pauly v. Pauly, 686 N.E.2d 1108 (Ohio 1997) (standards for child-support orders and review)
- Marker v. Grimm, 601 N.E.2d 496 (Ohio 1992) (trial court must follow mandatory statutory child-support requirements)
- Sapinsley v. Sapinsley, 869 N.E.2d 702 (Ohio App. 2007) (trial-court statutory requirements are binding)
- Wilson v. Harvey, 842 N.E.2d 83 (Ohio App. 2005) (definition and effect of stipulations)