Sterns v. Sterns
2015 Ohio 3866
Ohio Ct. App.2015Background
- Nicole (Wife) and Anthony Sterns (Husband) divorced in 2012; separation agreement and shared parenting plan (incorporated into the decree) set spousal support $900/mo for 72 months and child support $799.67/mo for two children, each subject to modification for changed circumstances.
- Husband filed a post-decree motion (2014) to modify both child and spousal support for a change in financial circumstances; no supporting memorandum and Husband did not testify or present witness testimony at the modification hearing.
- Husband’s attorney made unsworn narrative arguments and referenced multiple exhibits; the magistrate stated she would admit two exhibits but the appellate record contains no admitted exhibits.
- The magistrate reduced spousal support to $250/mo and child support to about $535–546/mo; Wife objected, arguing Husband bore the burden to prove the change and that the court improperly shifted the burden to her.
- The trial court overruled Wife’s objections, citing Wife’s failure to produce financial documentation; Wife appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Sterns (Wife) Argument | Husband Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether there was sufficient admissible evidence to justify reducing child support | Husband failed to present competent, admissible evidence; moving party (Husband) bore burden | Court relied on counsel statements and unspecified exhibits to find income decreased | Reversed: Husband presented no admissible evidence; burden improperly shifted to Wife |
| Whether there was sufficient evidence and proper analysis to reduce spousal support under R.C. 3105.18(C) | Husband did not prove an unanticipated substantial change or address statutory factors; trial court failed to require proof | Trial court accepted counsel’s representations and faulted Wife for lacking documents | Reversed: No competent proof of change; court improperly shifted burden to Wife and failed to base reduction on admissible evidence |
Key Cases Cited
- Mottice v. Mottice, 118 Ohio App.3d 731 (9th Dist. 1997) (moving party bears burden to show change was not contemplated and support is no longer appropriate)