McMurchie
304 P.3d 751
Or. Ct. App.2013Background
- Mother and Father divorced in 2002; initially ordered Father to pay $1,057/month and provide health insurance.
- In 2006, the division reduced Father’s obligation to $497/month; the trial court entered the order.
- In 2008, Father’s wife won a $3.3 million Oregon Lottery prize; funds were deposited jointly and used for debts, gifts, home, and investments; both stopped working, living off investment interest (~$40,000/year).
- Division moved to set aside the 2006 order in 2008; trial court voided it; in 2009 Mother sought a new order and cash medical support for younger child.
- In 2010 ALJ awarded Mother $1,245/month child support and $586/month cash medical; ALJ based Father’s presumed income on lottery winnings spent for Father’s benefit.
- Trial court remanded after disputes over whether Father’s income should include wages, lottery winnings, and investments; issues on remand center on proper presumed income and rebuttal factors.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Proper method to calculate presumed income | Mother argues for inclusion of lottery-spent amounts as income used on Father’s behalf. | Father argues income should be limited to either minimum-wage potential or half of lottery-related interest, not both. | Remand to recalculate income using presumed income as minimum-wage potential; exclude combination of actual and potential income. |
| Whether lottery principal constitutes other resources | Lottery principal should be considered as other available resources affecting unjust/inappropriate presumptions. | Lottery assets are not properly considered as income or resources under the rebuttal factors on remand. | Lottery winnings principal may be considered as other available resources on remand. |
| Whether interest on lottery winnings can be considered rebuttal resource | Interest ($≈$40,000/year) should be treated as income/resources affecting the calculation. | Interest may be considered as resources used for living expenses; may be used as a rebuttal factor. | Interest on lottery winnings may be considered as a rebuttal resource on remand. |
Key Cases Cited
- Nice v. Townley, 248 Or App 616 (2012) (standard of review in appellate review of child support decisions)
- Cain and Gilbert, 196 Or App 28 (2004) (remand and consideration of rebuttal factors in support determinations)
- Malpass and Malpass, 255 Or App 233 (2013) (guidelines interpretation and income adjustments on review)
- Bock and Bock, 249 Or App 241 (2012) (guidelines interpretation and income presumptions)
- State v. Gaines, 346 Or 160 (2009) (textual interpretation of disjunctive 'or' in regulatory language)