Court Opinion

ID: 9646997
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-23 13:20:09.863526+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:11:44.563248
License: Public Domain

Donald L. Corbin, Justice, dissenting. I dissent. The majority seems to be rigidly linked to the family support chart. It requires strict adherence to a recitation by the chancellor that the court has sifted through the relevant factors announced in our Per Curiam of February 5, 1990, one by one to determine the appropriate amounts of child support. The majority admits it is essentially correct that the support chart is not mandatory. The majority does hold that a reference to the chart is mandatory. I have no difficulty in reading and understanding that the chancellor did “reference the chart” when he stated in his order that he declined to follow the chart. I would affirm.