Court Opinion

ID: 9788745
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 01:17:10.416287+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:37:16.401433
License: Public Domain

VOIGT, Justice, dissenting,
with whom LEHMAN, Justice, joins.
[125] I agree, for the most part, with the majority's analysis and conclusions. I dissent, however, because there are two aspects of the district court's decision that should not receive this Court's approval. First, I do not believe that the custodial parent's income for child support computation purposes should be reduced by charitable contributions. Charitable contributions, which are voluntary, are not of the same nature as the items that statutorily may reduce "income" to "net income." See Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 20-2-308(a)@) and (iii) (LexisNexis 2008). Second, there should not be an upward deviation in the non-custodial parent's child support obligation based on the custodial parent's decision to contribute to an adult child's college expenses. Both with charitable contributions and with college expenses, the effect of the court's order is to force the noncustodial parent partially to fund the custodial parent's unilateral financial decisions.
[126] I would reverse and remand with instructions to the district court to omit these "expenses" when calculating child support.
*843KIDS AGAINST POLLUTION v. CAL. DENTAL ASSN. Cal. 848 Citeas 76 P.3d 843 (Cal. 2003)
1