Reilly v. Northrup, 314 P.3d 1206

Non-marital relationship produced son Barlow; Reilly moved to Montana and had limited full-time employment, renting/repairing properties and running a bar.
Vinette has custody of Barlow during the school year; Reilly has six weeks of summer custody.
Original support set at $897/month; later reduced to $487/month when Reilly worked for the State of Montana; further adjustments reduced to $442/month.
Reilly petitioned for modification due to income decline; CSSD proposed an imputed income based on Montana’s construction and extraction occupations; Vinette opposed as voluntary underemployment.
Superior Court found Reilly voluntarily underemployed, imputed income using southwest Montana average for construction and extraction, awarded 50% visitation credit for summer visits; written order omitted the visitation credit; appeal pursued.
Court affirms most findings and remands to include the missing visitation credit in the written order.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the court properly imputes income to Reilly.	Reilly contends imputation was improper.	Court may impute based on potential earning capacity.	Imputation upheld; not abuse of discretion.
Whether the imputed income calculation used appropriate basis.	Imputed income based on wrong evidence; should follow Civil Rule 90.3.	Average wage for closely related occupation is appropriate.	Court correctly imputed income using construction and extraction occupations.
Whether the summer visitation credit should be included in the final order.	Court granted 50% credit orally; final order omitted it.	Credit was discretionary but should be reflected.	Remand to amend final order to include visitation credit.
Whether CSSD’s initial calculation binds the court.	Court should have adopted CSSD’s calculation.	Court must determine facts; CSSD cannot bind judicial decision.	Court was not bound by CSSD’s initial calculation.
Whether Reilly’s arguments about underemployment were adequately supported.	Medical conditions and childcare precluded full-time work.	Court found conditions did not preclude full-time work.	Court’s findings supported; no clear error.

Kestner v. Clark, 182 P.3d 1117 (Alaska 2008) (standard for underemployment and substantial hardship analysis)
Sawicki v. Haxby, 186 P.3d 546 (Alaska 2008) (abuse-of-discretion standard for imputation and proportional allowances)
O’Connell v. Christenson, 75 P.3d 1037 (Alaska 2003) (use of earnings that reflect earning capacity rather than education)
Ward v. Urling, 167 P.3d 48 (Alaska 2007) (guidance on imputing income and considering totality of circumstances)
Robinson v. Robinson, 961 P.2d 1000 (Alaska 1998) (defining abuse of discretion in child support modiﬁcation)