Kohl v. Kohl, 2013 Mo. App. LEXIS 408

Background

Married in 1992; four children born of the marriage.
Judgment of dissolution in 2005 approved separation agreement, awarding joint custody; original child support was $565/month and two exemptions.
A 2006 modification increased child support to $1,309/month via jointly prepared Form 14; parties agreed income figures and a Line 11 credit for overnight visitation.
Mother quit a Sunday job to care for children; Father began paying approximately $150/month extra and covered several child-related expenses.
In 2010 Mother moved to modify support; 2011 court found substantial and continuing change, set new support at $2,647/month based on Mother’s income and a Form 14 prepared later by Mother’s attorney, and awarded Mother all four tax exemptions; court also awarded attorney’s fees to Mother and noted potential credits for Father upon remand.
This appeal challenges the modification on multiple grounds, culminating in a reversal and remand for further proceedings.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether § 452.370.1’s 20% change rule applies when prior decree deviated from guidelines.	Father contends 20% trigger does not apply since previous decree wasn’t based on the PCSA.	Mother/trial court used the 20% standard based on Form 14.	Applicable; modification based on 20% change applied; point denied.
Whether Mother pleaded and proved a substantial and continuing change in circumstances.	Mother’s petition relied on the 20% change; argument tied to § 452.370.1.	Change in circumstances shown by income, visitation, and time since last modification.	Sufficient pleading and proof; point denied.
Whether the court erred by not imputing income for Mother’s underemployment.	Mother underemployed; court should impute income.	Mother testified to limited hours; court reasonably found no underemployment.	No abuse; court properly weighed evidence; point denied.
Whether the Form 14 calculation properly included $208/month interest and ignored bonuses.	Court failed to credit interest income and erred regarding bonuses.	Wage/income evidence supported; bonuses uncertain and not reliably includable.	Weight of the evidence shows $2,073/month income is unsupported; point granted.
Whether all four tax exemptions should be awarded to Mother or redistributed to reflect the actual benefit to the family.	Awarding all four exemptions to Mother unjustified; harm to Father’s tax liability without corresponding benefit.	Original division left intact; exemptions may be reconsidered on remand.	Remand to reevaluate exemptions to maximize family unit benefit; not improper per se.

Key Cases Cited

Murphy v. Carron, 536 S.W.2d 30 (Mo. banc 1976) (standard of review for trial court rulings)
Cross v. Cross, 318 S.W.3d 187 (Mo. App. W.D.2010) (review of evidentiary weight; deference to trial court)
Wightman v. Wightman, 295 S.W.3d 183 (Mo. App. E.D.2009) (standard for reviewing income imputation; weight of evidence)
Eaton v. Bell, 127 S.W.3d 690 (Mo. App. W.D.2004) (substantial and continuing change required for modification)
Nevins v. Green, 317 S.W.3d 691 (Mo. App. W.D.2010) (Assumption 7 of Form 14; PCSA rebuttal requirements for exemptions)
In re Marriage of Wilson, 181 S.W.3d 575 (Mo. App. S.D.2005) (modification despite settlement agreement; 452.370.1 applicability)
Talley v. Bulen, 193 S.W.3d 881 (Mo. App. S.D.2006) (when PCSA deviation, 20% rule not applicable)
Pickering v. Pickering, 314 S.W.3d 822 (Mo. App. W.D.2010) (imputing income discretion considerations)
Moran v. Mason, 236 S.W.3d 137 (Mo. App. S.D.2007) (burden to prove changed circumstances for modification)
In re Marriage of Lindhorst, 347 S.W.3d 474 (Mo. banc 2011) (changed circumstances and calculation standards)
Russell v. Russell, 210 S.W.3d 191 (Mo. banc 2007) (trial court’s discretion in considering bonuses in Form 14)
In re Eskew, 31 S.W.3d 543 (Mo. App. S.D.2000) (tax exemption awards and abuse of discretion considerations)