Stein v. Stein, 1 CA-CV 16-0493-FC

Jay Stein (Father) and Jill Stein (Mother) divorced after a 2005 marriage; they have four children (triplets, age 10, and an 11‑year‑old). Father is primary residential parent; Mother has highly supervised, limited parenting time.
Father’s annual gross income ~ $3 million; Mother was not working at dissolution; premarital agreement precluded spousal maintenance.
Initial divorce decree ordered Father to pay $7,500/month child support; appellate court remanded for additional findings because the superior court had not explained its deviation from the Child Support Guidelines. Stein v. Stein, 238 Ariz. 548 (App. 2015).
On remand the superior court reduced support to $6,240/month, allocating 80% of child‑support expenses to Father and 20% to Mother, and included specified expense amounts (home, auto, nanny, children’s monthly needs, and $20,000/year for vacations).
Father moved for new trial; superior court denied. Father appealed the $6,240 award and denial of new trial. The Court of Appeals reversed and remanded for new child‑support findings.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Father)	Defendant's Argument (Mother)	Held
Waiver of challenge to support amount	Father preserved objections and proposed $1,200/month; did not waive challenge	Mother argued Father waived by not arguing at trial or proposing amount	Court: No waiver; Father raised amount at trial and in post‑trial motions and appeal
Vacation expenses included in support	Court overstated vacations; no evidentiary support for $20,000/year figure	Mother pointed to affidavit requesting $25,000/year but offered no trial evidence tying vacations to pre‑divorce standard of living	Court: Inclusion of $20,000/year vacation expense was unsupported and an abuse of discretion
80/20 allocation of child‑support expenses	Allocation lacks mathematical basis and fails to explain how 80/20 was calculated; did not account for Mother’s limited parenting time	Mother argued she personally benefited from some expenses, justifying an offset	Court: Allocation abused discretion—record lacks explanation/mathematical basis for 80/20 split
Attorney's fees on appeal	Father sought to avoid fees	Mother sought fees under A.R.S. § 25‑324 based on disparity and reasonableness	Court: Awarded Mother appellate attorney’s fees; to be determined per Appellate Rule 21(b)

Stein v. Stein, 238 Ariz. 548 (App. 2015) (remanding initial child‑support award for findings supporting deviation)
Nash v. Nash, 232 Ariz. 473 (App. 2013) (permissible to consider pre‑dissolution lifestyle for children when supported by evidence)
In re Marriage of Kells, 182 Ariz. 480 (App. 1995) (unsupported deviations from guidelines must be set aside)
Elliot v. Elliot, 165 Ariz. 128 (App. 1990) (appellate review requires record identifying evidence supporting awards)
Reed v. Reed, 154 Ariz. 101 (App. 1987) (court must distinguish children’s expenses from parent’s personal expenses)