Martin v. Martin
303 P.3d 421
Alaska2013Background
- Gregory and Melody Martin dissolved marriage in 2006 with joint legal and shared physical custody under a detailed parenting plan.
- The plan provided Melody with 70% custody and Gregory with 30% (77%/23% under some calculations) and an established visitation schedule.
- In 2010 the parties cross-moved to modify custody; Melody sought weekend adjustments and Gregory sought equal time.
- The superior court kept the underlying custody provisions but modified the visitation schedule for better dispute management.
- The court also ruled on child support, life insurance, Permanent Fund Dividends, and attorney’s fees, leading to Gregory’s appeal.
- The court ultimately reversed the child support calculation and the allocation of the tax deductions related to the children, remanding for recalculation.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Modification of visitation vs custody under statute | Gregory contends modification reduces his custody | Melody argues visitation changes are proper without full custody change | Visitation modified; no abuse of discretion on custody |
| Health insurance deduction and tax-dependency arrangement | Gregory claims error in deducting full premium and allowing Melody to claim both children | Melody argues court’s approach was permissible | Plain error; reverse health-insurance deduction and recalculate support |
| Inclusion of adoption subsidies in income under Rule 90.3 | Adoption subsidies should be counted as income | Subsidies are child benefits, not parental income | Adoption subsidies not included as income |
| Treatment of Earned Income Tax Credit for income | Melody’s EITC should be included as income | EITC is means-based and not income | EITC not counted as income |
Key Cases Cited
- Heather W. v. Rudy R., 274 P.3d 478 (Alaska 2012) (means-based income rules in child support)
- Collier v. Harris, 261 P.3d 397 (Alaska 2011) (custody/visitation standards; abuse of discretion review)
- Havel v. Havel, 216 P.3d 1148 (Alaska 2009) (factors in custody determinations; deference to court findings)
- Knudson v. Knudson, 973 P.2d 596 (Alaska 1999) (contract interpretation in dissolution proceedings)