Court Opinion

ID: 9594573
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 00:31:14.484356+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:33:00.957156
License: Public Domain

Hunt, Chief Justice,
concurring.
I concur with the outcome reached by the majority, but I write because I believe that the resolution of this case turns, not on the type of action before the trial court, in this case modification, but rather on the subject matter of the case, child support. While it is true that parties may not modify child support without the approval of the court, it must be remembered that the amount of child support cannot be fixed in the first place without court approval. In other words, I would emphasize that cases such as these are resolved not on a determination that an agreement concerning modification of child support becomes enforceable only when made the order of the court pursuant to the relevant statutes governing child support, but rather on the basis that any agreement concerning child support, whether the original fixing of the amount or a change in the amount, must be subjected to the necessary and statutorily mandated judicial scrutiny. *102Such an emphasis will serve as a reminder to the courts that the guidelines were instituted by the legislature because of its concern, not for procedural niceties, but for the needs of children.
Decided March 6, 1995.
J. Stephen Schuster, for appellant.
Ellis, Funk, Goldberg & Labovitz, Eugene P. Chambers III, Stephen M. Worrall, for appellee.