Court Opinion

ID: 9513706
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-06 22:39:27.826812+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:05:59.058270
License: Public Domain

NEUMANN, Justice,
concurring specially.
[¶ 28] I concur in the result. I agree with Justice Maring that imputation of income is appropriate for spousal support purposes, if supported by the evidentiary record, but I cannot affirm the imputation in this case. The trial court found Gerald Christianson had made a concerted and good faith attempt to obtain employment as a school superintendent, but made no findings as to his earning ability in any other area.
[¶ 29] Even though the trial court found that, despite his good faith effort, Gerald Christianson could not obtain employment as a school superintendent, the trial court also effectively found that the salary of a school superintendent is an appropriate measure of Gerald Christian-son’s current earning ability. The two findings are simply inconsistent. I do not think our law permits an imputation of income for spousal support purposes based only on the obligor’s prior employment, without some reason to believe his prior employment is an appropriate measure of his current earning ability.
[¶ 30] I would remand for additional proceedings to determine Gerald Chris-tianson’s earning ability, and for an award of spousal support based on that earning ability.
[¶ 31] WILLIAM A. NEUMANN concurs.