Pratt v. Ferber
335 S.W.3d 90
Mo. Ct. App.2011Background
- In a 2005 dissolution, the parties were awarded joint custody of their daughter, with Father ordered to pay $650 monthly child support and each party to bear half of extraordinary expenses up to $50 monthly.
- Mother later moved to modify child support and visitation; a 2009 hearing addressed evidence that Father’s income had increased and that he had not paid half of the daughter’s extras and non-covered medical costs.
- Evidence showed Daughter participated in gym and YMCA activities; Mother claimed Father repeatedly refused to pay half of lessons and gymnastics costs (about $170/month).
- The motion court amended the judgment, retaining joint custody but rejecting Form 14 presumption, setting child support at $885/month, and allowing Mother sole discretion over extracurriculars with expenses shared, removing the $50 cap; Father was ordered to pay $25,317.35 in Mother’s attorney’s fees.
- The amended judgment also kept a life-insurance provision from the separation agreement, payable for Daughter via Father’s irrevocable life policy.
- Father appeals, challenging the extracurricular expense provision, the way income was used to determine support, the life-insurance requirement, and attorney’s fees.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Extracurricular expenses certainty | Ferber argues lack of cap renders obligation open-ended | Ferber contends decision lacks limiting criteria and enforceability | Partial reversal; cap imposed and open-ended terminology narrowed |
| Imputation of income and Form 14 use | Father objects to imputing income from former jobs | Court could use factors to determine reasonable support; Form 14 not binding here | Denied; no improper imputation found in record |
| Life insurance for child’s benefit | Court cannot require life insurance benefitting a child | Life-insurance provision from separation agreement binding if not unconscionable | Denied; provision from separation agreement remains enforceable |
| Attorney's fees award | Award not supported by substantial evidence | Court has discretion on fees; evidence supported | Denied; fee award upheld |
Key Cases Cited
- Krane v. Krane, 912 S.W.2d 473 (Mo. banc 1995) (enforceability of assigned child-related expenses when based on agreement)
- Bryson v. Bryson, 624 S.W.2d 92 (Mo. App. E.D.1981) (relaxed definiteness for incorporated separation agreements)
- Toomey v. Toomey, 636 S.W.2d 313 (Mo. banc 1982) (minimum monthly educational expenses may be enforced with modification remedies)
- Echele v. Echele, 782 S.W.2d 430 (Mo. App. E.D.1989) (dissolution decrees may be made certain by ministerial computation or hearing)
- Fulton v. Adams, 924 S.W.2d 548 (Mo. App. W.D.1996) (extracurricular or college costs must have limiting criteria to be enforceable)