Rodney Kapanga v. Tiffany Nicole Kapanga
326874
| Mich. Ct. App. | Oct 13, 2016Background
- Rodney and Tiffany Kapanga married in 2012 and had one child (RK) in 2013; RK has craniosynostosis. Divorce filed by Rodney ~8 months after birth; Tiffany filed a countercomplaint seeking spousal support, attorney fees, and health expense payment.
- Parties attended Friend of the Court (FOC) early intervention; they settled spousal support, agreed Tiffany would retain primary physical custody and joint legal custody, but left child support, parenting time details, and property/marital debt issues unresolved.
- Court issued a scheduling order requiring discovery and mediation by March 9, 2015, and trial set for March 30; parties did not submit financial questionnaires to FOC and mediation did not occur.
- Tiffany’s attorney moved to withdraw (grievance followed); court granted withdrawal and warned Tiffany trial would proceed if unresolved.
- At bench trial March 30, child support was the primary contested issue; attorneys had jointly prepared an MCSF calculation imputing minimal income to Tiffany (20 hrs at minimum wage) producing ~$1,069.63/month. Tiffany produced no documentary evidence and orally sought adjournment and retroactive support; court denied delays, entered proposed judgment with minor modification for possible pregnancy, and advised she could later seek modification if she produced proof.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Kapanga) | Defendant's Argument (Tiffany) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of findings of fact | Judgment lacked specific findings to support orders | Court failed to make required findings | Findings were adequate because most issues were settled and child support findings were supported by counsel’s MCSF calculation; no further findings required |
| Denial of adjournment | Trial should be adjourned due to counsel withdrawal, lack of interim support, and incomplete FOC/mediation | Court warned of trial date; plaintiff had opportunity and notice to present evidence | Denial not an abuse of discretion; Tiffany had notice and failed to present required evidence |
| Child support calculation & imputation of income | Income should not be imputed because parties agreed she left work to care for child; she lacks work history/has childcare burdens | Counsel jointly prepared an MCSF; court may impute income based on factors and lack of proof to the contrary | Imputing minimal income (20 hrs at minimum wage) was within discretion; Tiffany presented no evidence on MCSF factors and imputation was harmless (only $5 difference) |
| Retroactive child support | Support should be retroactive to date complaint filed | No motion for interim or temporary support was filed | Court correctly refused retroactive support; statutes limit retroactivity and require a motion for interim support |
Key Cases Cited
- Ford Motor Co v Dep’t of Treasury, 313 Mich App 572 (trial-court findings need only be brief, definite, and pertinent)
- Carlson v Carlson, 293 Mich App 203 (trial court discretion to impute income under MCSF and required factors for imputation)
- In re Utrera, 281 Mich App 1 (standard of review for adjournment/continuance decisions)
- Loutts v Loutts, 298 Mich App 21 (abuse-of-discretion review for spousal support rulings)
- Kloian v Schwartz, 272 Mich App 232 (timing for motion to disqualify judge to preserve issue)
- King v Oakland Co Prosecutor, 303 Mich App 222 (appellate review limited to plain error when disqualification not timely raised)
- Armstrong v Ypsilanti Charter Twp, 248 Mich App 573 (judicial rulings alone do not establish bias)