Mallory D. v. Malcolm D.
309 P.3d 845
Alaska2013Background
- Mallory D. appeals a superior court modification of child support against Malcolm D. following a dissolution and custody arrangement.
- The court considered Malcolm’s self-employment income from an urethane foam insulation business and Malcolm’s deductions, reimbursements, and in-kind contributions.
- Mallory testified she worked about 30 hours per week at $18/hour, with winter variability and limitations on full-time work due to custody schedules.
- The superior court relied on Malcolm’s 2011 tax return to set income and imputing Mallory’s income at $18/hour for full-time work.
- Mallory argues the court failed to probe Malcolm’s business expenses and in-kind benefits and erred by underemploying Mallory; the court remanded for recalculation.
- This Court reverses the order, holding the court did not apply the proper legal standard and must reevaluate Malcolm’s deductions and reimbursements and Mallory’s underemployment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did the court properly examine Malcolm’s self-employment income? | Mallory: deductions and in-kind benefits must reduce living expenses. | Malcolm: 2011 tax return accurately reflects income. | No; remand to reevaluate deductions and reimbursements. |
| Should Mallory's income be imputed for underemployment? | Mallory not underemployed; hours limited by employer. | Court can impute income if underemployment exists. | Beaudoin not a bright-line rule; remand to determine voluntary/unreasonable underemployment. |
| Was Beaudoin correctly applied to Mallory's situation? | Beaudoin supports imputing full-time income when capable. | Beaudoin sets a broader evidentiary rule; not a rigid mandate. | Incorrect to require full-time imputation; remand for totality-of-circumstances analysis. |
| Should 2010 income be considered for a separate or averaged order? | 2010 income shows higher earnings; should affect 2010 period. | 2010 income not fully addressed in remand. | Remand to consider 2010 income for a separate order or average. |
Key Cases Cited
- Mallory D. v. Malcolm D., 290 P.3d 1194 (Alaska 2012) (precedent cited within opinion)
- Beaudoin v. Beaudoin, 24 P.3d 523 (Alaska 2001) (imputation of income under 90.3; private evidence permitted)
- Swaney v. Granger, 297 P.3d 132 (Alaska 2013) (probing review of self-employment income under Rule 90.3)
- Sawicki v. Haxby, 186 P.3d 546 (Alaska 2008) (context for imputation and income review)
- Coghill v. Coghill, 836 P.2d 921 (Alaska 1992) (limitations on deductions in support calculations)