In Re the Marriage of Lisa A. Jacobs and Scott D. Jacobs Upon the Petition of Lisa A. Jacobs, and Concerning Scott D. Jacobs, and Natalie A. Jacobs, Interested Party-Appellee.
16-2005
| Iowa Ct. App. | Nov 8, 2017Background
- Scott and Lisa Jacobs divorced in 1996; the decree allowed continuation of child support for postsecondary education through age 22. Their daughter Natalie was two at divorce.
- In 2013 Scott sought termination/modification of support and a declaration that Natalie repudiated him; the district court instead found good cause for a postsecondary education subsidy and authorized equal parental responsibility for remaining costs, leaving dollar amounts to be determined later.
- Natalie attended community college, then transferred to an Illinois school for dental hygiene; disputes arose over Scott’s contributions and required financial disclosures.
- In 2015 Natalie filed a declaratory-judgment petition after graduating; the district court calculated costs under Iowa Code § 598.21F, entered judgment against Scott for $7,666, and ordered him to pay $4,000 of Natalie’s trial attorney fees.
- On appeal the court reviewed: (1) whether good cause existed (res judicata argument), (2) whether subsidy could cover prior expenses, (3) correct calculation of Natalie’s expected contribution (income/financial aid), and (4) authority to award attorney fees for the declaratory action.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether court had authority to impose postsecondary subsidy (good cause) | Natalie: prior 2013 order found good cause; enforcement appropriate | Scott: no good cause now; issue should be reconsidered | Res judicata: 2013 order finally decided good-cause; Scott precluded from relitigating |
| Whether subsidy can be awarded retroactively for expenses incurred before Natalie’s 2015 petition | Natalie: 2013 determination put Scott on notice; subsidy covers later-incurred costs | Scott: Neff requires prospective award only after petition | Court: Neff distinguishable; here 2013 determination made subsidy effective before Natalie incurred costs, so retroactive award valid |
| Proper computation of Natalie’s expected contribution (income/aid) | Natalie: court’s figures correct; she applied for aid and worked as testified | Scott: district miscalculated Natalie’s income, overstated parental obligation | Appellate court adjusted child income upward to $10,000/year, reducing Scott’s liability to $4,166.50 |
| Whether trial attorney fees can be awarded for Natalie’s declaratory petition | Natalie: fees justified because underlying nonpayment prompted action | Scott: no statutory basis; declaratory judgment action not covered by fee statutes | Court: dissolution statutes don’t authorize fees for post-decree declaratory actions; $4,000 fee award reversed |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Marriage of Vaughan, 812 N.W.2d 688 (Iowa 2012) (explains postsecondary education subsidy framework under § 598.21F)
- In re Marriage of Neff, 675 N.W.2d 573 (Iowa 2004) (addresses prospective nature of subsidy absent an earlier determination)
- Gail v. W. Convenience Stores, 434 N.W.2d 862 (Iowa 1989) (res judicata bars relitigation of issues decided in a prior final judgment)
- In re Marriage of McGinley, 724 N.W.2d 458 (Iowa Ct. App. 2006) (delineates statutory bases for awarding attorney fees in dissolution-related proceedings)