Court Opinion

ID: 9514457
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-06 22:49:44.446956+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:06:17.974568
License: Public Domain

AMUNDSON, Justice
(concurring in result on Issue I).
[¶ 49] In Ochs v. Nelson, 538 N.W.2d 527, 530-31 (S.D.1995), this court affirmed an award of child support of $1,733 for a three-year-old child without any showing of what the actual needs of the child were. I dissented in Ochs based on the lack of any evidence reflecting what the actual needs of this minor child were. Id. at 531-33 (Amundson, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part).
[¶ 50] Following Ochs, based on a $485,000 income of the father in this case, it would seem mathematically logical to extrapolate a child support obligation of $6,932 or more for the older minor children. On the other hand, the record in this case discloses a trial court that looked at the actual needs of the children and not whether mother needed a new car, what mother’s credit card balance is, trips for mother, and other various and sundry wants of mother.
[¶ 51] Therefore, I find that this decision sends a clear message to the bar and trial judges that actual needs of a minor child are to be considered in setting child support.
[¶ 52] I concur on all other issues.