564 P.3d 272
Alaska2025Background
- Robert Wills and Aniela Humphries, formerly married, have three children and initially shared joint legal and physical custody after their 2012 divorce.
- In 2020, Wills violated the custody order by withholding their middle child from Humphries, resulting in a court-ordered reunification and a $21,000 award of attorney’s fees to Humphries in 2021.
- Wills later moved with two minor children to South Carolina and sought primary physical custody, which the superior court granted, making Humphries responsible for $1,070.89 in monthly child support.
- Humphries requested that her child support payments be offset by the attorney's fees Wills still owed her, claiming manifest injustice would occur otherwise.
- The superior court granted the offset, finding good cause and that it was in the children’s best interests, allowing Humphries to reduce her current support obligations until the fee debt was satisfied.
- Wills appealed the order, arguing the offset was improper and/or incorrectly calculated.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a court may offset attorney’s fees owed against child support | Wills: Offsets are not allowed under Rule 90.3 and no good cause here | Humphries: Good cause exists, manifest injustice without offset | Offset allowed if good cause and best interests shown |
| Whether manifest injustice and good cause existed | Wills: No details supporting manifest injustice | Humphries: It’s unfair to pay support while owed fees | Court found manifest injustice, good cause |
| Whether the offset was calculated correctly | Wills: Humphries’s accounting is inaccurate | Humphries: Used proper, corrected accounting | Court accepted Humphries’s corrected accounting |
| Appropriateness of Superior Court’s discretion | Wills: Court abused discretion | Humphries: Decision was within court’s discretion | No abuse of discretion found by Supreme Court |
Key Cases Cited
- Green v. State, Dep’t of Revenue, Child Support Enf’t Div., 983 P.2d 1249 (Alaska 1999) (offsets against child support require court approval and must serve child’s best interests)
- Pealatere v. State, Dep’t of Revenue, Child Support Enf’t Div., 996 P.2d 84 (Alaska 2000) (offset permitted if good cause and in best interests; case involved property in exchange for child support waiver)
- Miller v. Miller, 890 P.2d 574 (Alaska 1995) (offset allowed for social security benefits paid to children; established court discretion)
- Ruppe v. Ruppe, 358 P.3d 1284 (Alaska 2015) (child support formula deviations must be for good cause; excess voluntary payments rarely offset future support)
- Rosenbaum v. Shaw, 459 P.3d 467 (Alaska 2020) (offsets for overpayments limited to past due, not future, child support obligations)
- Brandal v. Shangin, 36 P.3d 1188 (Alaska 2001) (court may offset child support with marital property if in child’s best interests)