Jackson v. Sanders, 299 Ga. 332

Background

Father and Mother divorced in 2001; original child support was $1,005/month based on Father’s $250,000 annual salary. 2007 Cobb County decree incorporated that support term.
In 2014 Mother sought upward modification of child support; Father moved to modify custody and support.
At trial the court found Father failed to produce reliable evidence of his gross income (evidence was incomplete, inconsistent, and not credible).
Trial court applied OCGA § 19-6-15(f)(4)(B), imputed Father’s income by escalating the 2001 $250,000 at 4% per year to $380,000, and set support at $3,994/month.
The Court of Appeals agreed the statute could be invoked but held the trial court erred by using a 4% increment rather than the statute’s prescribed “at least 10 percent per year” and remanded to recalculate if subsection (f)(4)(B) should be applied.
Georgia Supreme Court granted certiorari to resolve whether the statute’s increment is mandatory and the meaning of “reliable evidence of income.”

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Jackson)	Defendant's Argument (Sanders)	Held
1. Does OCGA § 19-6-15(f)(4)(B) apply when a parent fails to produce reliable evidence of income in a modification proceeding?	Father argued some evidence he produced was sufficient and the statute should not apply.	Mother argued statute applies when a parent fails to produce reliable evidence of gross income and no other reliable evidence exists.	The statute may be applied when (1) parent fails to produce, and (2) no other reliable evidence establishes a significant portion of total gross income.
2. Is the statute’s 10% per-year increment optional or mandatory if the court elects to use the statutory proxy?	Father argued trial court could use a lesser increment (discretion to choose amount).	Mother argued that if court uses the statutory proxy it must apply the prescribed increment.	If the court elects to apply the statutory proxy it must use the prescribed "at least 10% per year" increment; invoking the proxy is discretionary.
3. What is the meaning of "reliable evidence of income" for subsection (f)(4)(B)?	Father contended producing some documentation of portions of income should suffice to avoid the statute.	Mother contended reliable evidence must allow a trier to determine a significant portion of total gross income from all sources.	"Reliable evidence" means credible proof from which a trier can determine a significant portion of the parent’s total gross income.
4. Did the trial court err in finding Father failed to produce reliable income evidence?	Father argued the available evidence was sufficient for the court to estimate income.	Mother argued Father’s evidence was incomplete and not credible, justifying statutory remedy.	Court deferred to trial court: its finding that Father failed to present reliable evidence was not an abuse of discretion; remand to reconsider application under correct construction.

Key Cases Cited

Hankla v. Postell, 293 Ga. 692 (standard of review for statutory construction is de novo)
Autrey v. Autrey, 288 Ga. 283 (deference to trial court credibility findings and factual findings)
Deal v. Coleman, 294 Ga. 170 (rules of statutory construction: plain meaning and context)
Brogdon v. Brogdon, 290 Ga. 618 (methods for imputing income from expenses and business use)
Harris v. Snelgrove, 290 Ga. 181 (imputing income from earning capacity, assets, and circumstances)
Banciu v. Banciu, 282 Ga. 616 (considering earning capacity and lifestyle when income is understated)