In Re Marriage of Wood
44 Cal. Rptr. 236, 44 Cal. Rptr. 2d 236, 37 Cal.App.4th 1059 (1995)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A court may not consider the income of a parent's new spouse or nonmarital partner when determining or modifying child support, even indirectly through the parent's improved standard of living, unless excluding that income would cause extreme and severe hardship to the child.
Facts:
- Camilla Wood Casparis (Camilla) and William D. Wood, Jr. (William) dissolved their marriage, and Camilla was awarded physical custody of their three minor children.
- Initially, William paid $1,375 per month in child support, which was later stipulated up to $2,100 per month based on his increased income.
- In July 1992, Camilla married William Casparis, a very wealthy man.
- Camilla and Casparis had a prenuptial agreement which stated that his income was his separate property and that Camilla and her children had no rights to it.
- Camilla, who had previously worked part-time for her new husband's business, was unemployed at the time of the hearing.
- William had also remarried and was expecting a child with his new wife.
Procedural Posture:
- William D. Wood, Jr. filed an order to show cause in the trial court seeking to reduce his child support obligation to his ex-wife, Camilla Wood Casparis.
- William sought financial records from Camilla's new husband, who in turn filed a motion to quash the subpoena.
- The trial court held a hearing and found that special circumstances existed, justifying a departure from the statutory child support guideline.
- The trial court issued an order reducing William's child support obligation.
- Camilla, as Appellant, appealed the trial court's order to the California Court of Appeals, Sixth District; William is the Respondent.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a trial court abuse its discretion by deviating from the statutory child support guideline to reduce a father's obligation based on the custodial mother's improved standard of living resulting from her new wealthy spouse's income, in light of Family Code section 4057.5's prohibition against considering new spouse income?
Opinions:
Majority - Wunderlich, J.
Yes. A trial court abuses its discretion by reducing child support based on the custodial parent's improved lifestyle due to a new spouse's income, as this is an impermissible consideration under Family Code section 4057.5. The court reasoned that although the trial judge claimed only to be considering Camilla's improved 'standard of living,' this was functionally equivalent to considering her new husband's income, which is explicitly forbidden by statute. The court held that the general 'unjust or inappropriate' special circumstances exception in section 4057 cannot be used to override the specific and direct prohibition found in section 4057.5. The only exception to the prohibition on considering new spouse income is when excluding that income would lead to 'extreme and severe hardship' to a child. Since there was no evidence of such hardship, the trial court's deviation from the guideline was an error of law and an abuse of discretion.
Analysis:
This case solidifies the legislative intent behind Family Code section 4057.5, establishing a nearly absolute prohibition on the consideration of a new spouse's income in child support calculations. It clarifies that trial courts cannot use their general equitable discretion or the 'special circumstances' exception of section 4057 to indirectly achieve what section 4057.5 directly forbids. The decision sets a high bar for the 'extreme and severe hardship to the child' exception, making it the sole gateway for considering new spouse income and thereby promoting consistency and predictability in child support modifications.
Unlock the full brief for In Re Marriage of Wood