Opinion ID: 2637586
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Braces and contact lenses

Text: In the initial divorce decree, Sarkesian was ordered to pay the entire deductible and all other costs not covered by the [children's health care] policy. This was affirmed by the later settlement agreement, which provided that [a]ll provisions of [the June 1, 1992 order] relating to child support issues shall remain in full force and effect. Judge Zervos, in the June 18, 2001 superior court opinion from which this appeal originates, examined the medical bills that Hixson provided relating to the children's orthodontic treatment and ordered Sarkesian to reimburse her for the total amount of the bills. Sarkesian claims that because he was paying child support in excess of the income cap, he should not have been required to pay for unreimbursed medical expenses since those costs should have been included in calculating the economic needs of the children for which the higher payments were justified. [33] However, shifting these expenses to Sarkesian was part of the settlement agreed to by Sarkesian. He can and does argue that the cost shifting for future unreimbursed medical expenses should be changed, but it appears clear that absent such a modification, costs such as contact lenses and braces are something Sarkesian agreed not to litigate when he signed the settlement agreement. Sarkesian is therefore liable to Hixson for these expenses.