James P. v. Anna P. and Bureau for Child Support Enforcement
16-0961
| W. Va. | Sep 5, 2017Background
- James P. and Anna P. divorced; family court entered temporary and later final orders assessing child support based on attributed income of $90,000 per year to James.
- James was laid off from a mining job and later earned far less working for a family business; he claimed inability to pay the court-ordered support.
- James repeatedly sought reduction: filed expedited modification in 2013, appealed final divorce order in 2015, appealed a 2016 contempt/arrears order, and filed a May 2016 modification petition asserting changed circumstances (lower income, apartment benefit, coal industry downturn).
- Family court found James made little credible effort to obtain comparable employment, attributed income remained appropriate, and denied modification; it also held James in contempt for liquidating a retirement account and spending funds rather than paying arrears.
- Circuit court twice refused review/appeals of the family court’s orders; Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia affirmed, finding no clear error in factual findings or abuse of discretion in denying modification.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether petitioner proved a substantial change in circumstances warranting modification of child support | James: lost mining job, now earns far less, sought but failed to secure comparable employment; this is a substantial change | Anna/BCSE: family court reasonably attributed income to James because he could have secured comparable work and provided little credible evidence of job searches | Held: No. Family court’s finding that James failed to show significant change and lacked credible evidence is not clearly erroneous |
| Whether petitioner’s testimony and submitted job-search evidence established efforts to obtain comparable employment | James: submitted lists, resume, testified to applications and contacts | Anna/BCSE: lists lacked dates/confirmations; no employer correspondence; testimony lacked credibility | Held: No. Absence of corroborating evidence supports finding of insufficient proof |
| Whether the circuit court erred in refusing appeals from family court orders | James: circuit court should have reviewed and reversed family court findings | Anna/BCSE: circuit court properly applied deferential standards and found no error | Held: No. Circuit court correctly applied clearly erroneous/abuse-of-discretion standards and affirmed |
| Whether contempt and arrears rulings were improper given James’s financial situation | James: inability to pay due to unemployment should mitigate contempt/arrears | Anna/BCSE: James liquidated retirement and spent funds on nonessentials; contempt and arrears judgments appropriate | Held: No. Family court’s contempt finding supported by record and not clearly erroneous |
Key Cases Cited
- Carr v. Hancock, 216 W.Va. 474, 607 S.E.2d 803 (W.Va. 2004) (standard of review for circuit review of family court: factual findings clearly erroneous; law application abuse of discretion; questions of law de novo)
- State v. Guthrie, 194 W.Va. 657, 461 S.E.2d 163 (W.Va. 1995) (credibility determinations are for the trier of fact)