Opinion ID: 2270933
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Modification of the Child Support Agreement

Text: In light of the new custody arrangement, the judge ordered the parties to attempt to negotiate a new child support agreement by May 20, 2005. When the parties failed to reach an agreement by that date, the judge held an additional evidentiary hearing in July and August of 2005 on the issue of child support. In the written Memorandum Order of Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Judgment of Child Support, the trial judge found as follows. Ms. Craig was employed by the Cordell Hull Institute at an annual salary of $30,000.00. Combined, Ms. Craig's and the minor children's monthly expenses were approximately $12,655. At the time of the Agreement, Mr. Wilson had been a partner with the law firm of Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP (Wilmer Hale) earning a salary of as much as $700,000 per year. At the time of the hearing, Mr. Wilson was self-employed with Wilson International Law LLC, where he claimed to earn a salary of $240,000, but the judge found that he ha[d] the potential and ability to earn much more than he claim[ed]. Taking that fact into account, the judge determined that Mr. Wilson's adjusted income was $398,966. Applying the District of Columbia Child Support Guidelines, the judge found that he was required to make a monthly child support payment of $12,617. The judge found this substantial increase over the Agreement amount necessary in part due to the change from joint custody to Ms. Craig having sole custody, which the judge found had created a material change in circumstances that was unforseen at the time the agreement was entered. [1] Moreover, pursuant to the parties' Agreement, the judge made the increase in support retroactive to the date of the written request for modification, which the judge construed here to mean the June 4, 2006 Order she had issued requiring the parties to attempt to negotiate a new support arrangement. When Mr. Wilson failed to pay the retroactive child support as required, the judge held him in civil contempt. [2] Mr. Wilson argued that he was unable to pay the retroactive support; however, the judge was not persuaded, noting that his IRA account had a net portfolio value of at least $613,556.68, more than sufficient to pay the Court ordered retroactive child support in the amount of $83,972.32. Ultimately, Mr. Wilson paid the amount and the contempt was dissolved.