John M. Zupan, Jr. v. Heather M. Zupan
377 P.3d 770
Wyo.2016Background
- Parties divorced in 2004 with alternating annual residential custody and a child-support arrangement: Father paid $500/month while children lived with Mother; agreement was to expire July 15, 2008. The arrangement was later continued by the courts and affirmed on appeal in Zupan v. Zupan.
- In June 2011 parties stipulated that daughter would live with Mother permanently and son would remain shared; Father would pay $250/month for daughter and an additional $250 when both children were with Mother.
- Father filed a contempt motion in 2012; Mother counterclaimed to modify child support and requested retroactive modification to the date Father was served.
- The district court awarded Mother $18,813.81 in retroactive child support (May 2012–Jan 2015), offset by $2,069.16 for unreimbursed medical expenses, and set ongoing monthly support for the son at $466.55 beginning June 1, 2015.
- Father appealed, arguing (1) Smith rule bars modification absent proof of material change in circumstances and (2) the court miscalculated income and improperly allowed or imputed certain deductions and income items.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Smith rule precluded modification of child support | Father: prior stipulation triggers Smith; Mother needed to prove material change beyond a 20% deviation | Mother: custody change constituted a material change; district court found a 20% deviation | Court: Modification proper — custody change amounts to material change and district court found 20% deviation, so Smith requirements met |
| Proper method for calculating net income for presumptive support | Father: court should average incomes across 2012–2014; court improperly imputed rental income, benefits, and disallowed deductions | Mother: court correctly used evidence before it and exercised discretion in imputing and allowing deductions | Court: No abuse of discretion; using a single-year figure and the court's income findings were reasonable |
| Allowable deductions/expenses for income computation | Father: Mother’s tax deductions (home office, utilities, internet, cell) should not reduce income for child support; such items are not "legitimate business expenses" for support purposes | Mother: tax-return-based deductions can be considered and court may evaluate reasonableness and actual cash impact | Court: Federal tax treatment is not binding; court may allow reasonable business expenses; no abuse of discretion in allowing deductions |
| Recovery/credit for unreimbursed medical expenses | Mother (in district court): sought credit for unreimbursed medical expenses; on appeal she argued she should have been credited | Father: opposed | Court: Issue not disturbed on appeal because Mother did not cross-appeal the district court’s ruling on this point |
Key Cases Cited
- Smith v. Smith, 895 P.2d 37 (Wyo. 1995) (establishes rule that prior stipulations deviating 20%+ from guidelines require proof of material change to modify)
- Wright v. Wright, 5 P.3d 61 (Wyo. 2000) (clarifies and explains application of Smith rule)
- Bagley v. Bagley, 311 P.3d 141 (Wyo. 2013) (defines net income and statutory framework for presumptive child support)
- Ackerman v. Ott, 330 P.3d 271 (Wyo. 2014) (permits use of federal tax information and focuses on reasonableness of deductions when computing income for support)
- Zupan v. Zupan, 230 P.3d 329 (Wyo. 2010) (prior appeal affirming continuation of earlier custody/support arrangement)