Stahlbaum v. Pinson
36,119
| N.M. Ct. App. | Jun 27, 2017Background
- Petitioner (Stahlbaum) appealed a district court order finalizing child support issues after Respondent (Pinson) regained custody of the child.
- Petitioner challenged (1) child support being made retroactive to the date Respondent regained custody (which preceded the filing date of the modification petition), (2) denial of his request for interest, and (3) imposition of a payment deadline.
- The Court of Appeals issued a proposed summary disposition: affirm in part, reverse in part, remand. Petitioner did not file a response; Respondent filed a memorandum asserting equitable considerations.
- The appellate court concluded retroactive modification may only reach back to the date of the petition for modification, not to an earlier date when custody changed.
- The court noted equitable issues (estoppel, waiver, unclean hands) are relevant to calculation of arrears and should be addressed on remand.
- Because Petitioner did not oppose the proposed disposition on the interest and payment-deadline issues, those arguments were deemed abandoned and summarily rejected.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Retroactive child support start date | Support should be retroactive to date Respondent regained custody | Equitable considerations justify earlier retroactivity | Reversed as impermissible; retroactivity limited to petition date; remand for arrears determination considering equities |
| 2. Denial of interest | Requested interest on amounts owed | Respondent opposed | No abuse of discretion found; issue not pursued on appeal and deemed abandoned |
| 3. Imposition of payment deadline | Challenged court-imposed payment schedule | Respondent supported district court order | No abuse of discretion found; issue not pursued on appeal and deemed abandoned |
Key Cases Cited
- Zabolzadeh v. Zabolzadeh, 146 N.M. 125, 207 P.3d 359 (New Mex. Ct. App. 2009) (modification of child support may be retroactive only to date of petition for modification)
- Ullrich v. Blanchard, 142 N.M. 835, 171 P.3d 774 (N.M. Ct. App. 2007) (trial court should consider equitable defenses when calculating retroactive child support/arrears)
- Ingalls v. Ingalls, 119 N.M. 85, 888 P.2d 967 (N.M. Ct. App. 1994) (in enforcement of child support orders, trial court may consider equitable defenses)