MOORE v. McKINNEY
783 S.E.2d 373, 335 Ga. App. 855 (2016)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A court-ordered modification of child support obligations may only apply prospectively from the date of the modification order and cannot be applied retroactively. Additionally, a final child support order must include provisions detailing how the parents will share responsibility for the child's uninsured health care expenses.
Facts:
- In 2002, Anthony Moore and Janeene McKinney divorced, with McKinney receiving primary physical custody of their two children.
- The divorce decree ordered Moore to pay child support and required the parties to share the children's uninsured medical expenses.
- In January 2014, McKinney physically abused the children.
- Following the abuse, the children moved out of McKinney's home and began living with Moore full-time.
- The children both signed affidavits of election indicating their desire to live with Moore.
- Moore incurred several health care expenses for the children while they were in his care, but McKinney refused to pay her share.
Procedural Posture:
- In February 2014, Anthony Moore filed a petition in the trial court to modify physical custody and child support.
- The parties entered a temporary consent order giving Moore custody, terminating his child support obligation 'retroactively to January 31, 2014,' and reserving the issue of McKinney's support liability.
- Moore filed a motion for contempt against McKinney for her failure to pay her share of the children's uninsured medical expenses.
- Following a hearing, the trial court issued a final order granting Moore custody, holding McKinney in contempt, and ordering her to pay ongoing child support, back child support, and attorney's fees.
- Anthony Moore (appellant) appealed the trial court's final order to the Court of Appeals of Georgia; Janeene McKinney (appellee) did not file a responsive brief.
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 have the authority to retroactively modify a parent's child support obligation to a date prior to the entry of the modification order?
Opinions:
Majority - Peterson, Judge
No. A child support obligation may be modified on a prospective basis only. The trial court erred by making its order terminating Moore's child support obligation 'retroactive to January 31, 2014,' because the order was not entered until February 18, 2014. It is well-settled law, citing Jarrett v. Jarrett, that a child support judgment cannot be modified retroactively. This error also led to a miscalculation of the back child support McKinney owed. The court also erred by failing to include mandatory provisions in its final order for the payment of the child's uninsured health care expenses, as required by statute OCGA § 19-6-15(h)(3)(A).
Analysis:
This case reinforces the strict, bright-line rule against retroactive modification of child support in Georgia. It clarifies that even temporary or consent orders cannot backdate changes to support obligations, ensuring that financial duties are certain and only alterable on a forward-looking basis. This provides stability for both the obligor and the recipient, preventing sudden, unexpected liabilities from past periods. The decision also serves as a strong reminder to trial courts that including a plan for uninsured medical expenses is a mandatory, not discretionary, component of a final child support order.
