In Re Marriage of Frick and Perina
2011 MT 41
| Mont. | 2011Background
- Frick and Perina married February 26, 2008; lived in Australia for a period before Frick returned to the United States and filed for dissolution.
- Their daughter S.P.-F. was born in December 2008 in Great Falls, Montana, and has lived with Frick since then.
- The sole issue remaining after mediation was the amount of child support; a trial occurred on April 21, 2010.
- The court found Frick's earnings at $21,846 per year, daycare costs about $4,000 per year, and no medical insurance costs or uncovered medical expenses.
- The court found Perina's average 2009 mine income to be $75,242 and imputed an annual income of $62,702 for him, with a long-distance parenting adjustment of $4,000.
- The district court awarded $728 per month in child support and did not award retroactive support or medical expenses.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Imputation of Perina's income | Frick contends the court used proper income averaging; Perina's future earnings will be limited by visitation. | Perina argues averaging over prior years overestimates future income and ignores limited hours during visitation. | Affirmed imputed income of $62,702. |
| Travel expenses adjustment | Frick argues the district court correctly limited travel costs to the standard rate and did not err. | Perina seeks a larger travel offset for long-distance parenting not fully captured by the standard rate. | Affirmed long-distance parenting adjustment within Guidelines; no departure required. |
| Deviation from Admin. RM 37.62.130 without explicit findings | Perina contends the district court failed to state reasons for deviation from the rule. | Frick argues Perina's calculations misread the rule and that the record lacked adequate miles-driven data. | Affirmed adjustment; error noted but not prejudicial; substantial evidence supports the result. |
| Frick's medical insurance costs | Frick argues the court should consider potential future insurance costs and Medicaid eligibility changes. | Perina contends costs were speculative and no actual premiums were paid at the time. | Affirmed no inclusion of medical insurance costs; modification possible when actual costs are incurred. |
| Retroactive child support | Frick seeks retroactive support for early period of S.P.-F.'s life due to lack of support. | Perina argues past support amounts are disputed and travel costs expense travel justifies no retroactivity. | Affirmed denial of retroactive child support. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Tipton, 2010 MT 144, 357 Mont. 1, 239 P.3d 116 (Mont. 2010) (standard for reviewing dissolution findings and guidelines application)
- Albrecht v. Albrecht, 2002 MT 227, 311 Mont. 412, 56 P.3d 339 (Mont. 2002) (guidelines and income averaging in child support determinations)
- Graham v. Graham, 2008 MT 435, 347 Mont. 483, 199 P.3d 211 (Mont. 2008) (guidelines start point; actual circumstances considered)
- Haberkern, 2004 MT 29, 319 Mont. 393, 85 P.3d 743 (Mont. 2004) (trial court credibility and discretion in resolving conflicting evidence)
- Martinich-Buhl v. Martinich-Buhl, 2002 MT 224, 311 Mont. 375, 56 P.3d 317 (Mont. 2002) (credit for health insurance costs when actual costs are established)