Rutland v. Rutland

Louisiana Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit · Family Law

Family LawChild SupportRetroactivityVoluntary Underemploymentchild supportretroactive awardjudicial demandgood cause

Facts

After the parties separated and divorce proceedings began, the trial court awarded interim child support of $200 per month based on Mr. Rutland’s unemployed status. By the time of the final child support hearing, Mr. Rutland had been fired from two jobs, was working at Dixie Packaging for substantially less than he had earned at the sheriff’s office, and testified that he was still seeking higher-paying employment. He had also previously received money from the sale of his house and from withdrawing his pension, but testified that those funds had been used and were not ongoing income. The trial court found him underemployed, attributed to him a monthly earning potential of $3,000, and declined to make the final award retroactive.

Issue

Did the trial court abuse its discretion by refusing to make the final child support award retroactive to the date of judicial demand? Did the trial court err in calculating child support using a $3,000 monthly earning potential rather than Mr. Rutland’s former sheriff’s office wages or the proceeds from his pension withdrawal and house sale?

Rule

A final child support award is effective on the date the judgment is signed, but upon a showing of good cause a court may make the final award retroactive to the date of judicial demand even if an interim award was in effect. For child support purposes, gross income includes income from any source, including pensions, recurring monetary gifts, and capital gains; however, when a party is voluntarily unemployed or underemployed, support is calculated based on income earning potential, and prior wages are the best estimate of earning potential though not mandatory in every case.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

In a divorce proceeding in Baton Rouge, Lena Morris obtained an interim child support order requiring Devon Morris to pay $250 per month. At the final support hearing 14 months later, the evidence showed Devon had made every interim payment on time, and the delay in reaching the final hearing was partly caused by Lena's failure to timely submit court-ordered parenting-evaluation paperwork. Lena argues the final award should be retroactive to the date she first filed because Devon's earning ability was higher than originally believed.

How should the court most likely rule on retroactivity of the final child support award?

Explanation. The majority held that when an interim child support award is in effect, a final award is generally effective on the date the judgment is signed, but the court may make it retroactive to the date of judicial demand only upon a showing of good cause. Timely payment of interim support and delay attributable in part to the claimant weigh against good cause. (Derived from Rutland v. Rutland (n.d.).)