Posted on : February 29, 2016, By: Christopher Hildebrand
Deviation in Child Support in Arizona
In Arizona, the decision of the court regarding child support is made in accordance with child support guidelines. In some cases, the family court can deviate from Arizona child support guidelines as necessary and as pertaining to specific circumstances, but when doing so, must provide findings of fact and conclusions of law to support the decision. This is the matter the Arizona Court of Appeals had to consider in Stein v. Stein.
The Facts of the Case: Stein v. Stein
Jay David Stein (Father) and Jill Lynn Stein (Mother) were married in 2005 and divorced in 2014. The couple had four minor children. At the time of the dissolution, Mother did not work and Father had an income of over $3 million annually. A premarital agreement signed by both parties agreed that neither party would receive any spousal maintenance in the event of a divorce.
Father was awarded sole legal decision-making authority, as well as being named the primary residential parent. Mother was given supervised parenting time of one afternoon per week and one overnight every other weekend with Father covering 90% of the costs of the “supervision” required during Mother’s parenting time.
Deviation in Child Support.
The decision of the court was to deviate from the child support guidelines and award Mother $7,500 per month in child support. When Father moved for additional findings of fact and a new trial, he was provided with findings of fact (but only as pertaining to the attorney’s fees awarded to Mother) and denied a new trial. Father appealed contending that the court erred by failing to present specific factual findings in support of their deviation from child support guidelines. The child support order was reviewed for an abuse of discretion.
The Arizona Child Support Guidelines
According to the Arizona child support guidelines, the Court can order a parent to pay child support in an amount that is “reasonable and necessary” for the support of their minor children (A.R.S. Section 25-320(A)). In A.R.S. Section 25-320(D) the guidelines present a method for the calculation of what is reasonable and necessary.
The Supreme Court Creates the Arizona Child Support Guidelines
The Family Court is required to reward the amount of child support that would result from the application of the stated guidelines. The only exception is if the Court finds that the application of the guidelines would be inappropriate or unjust in a specific instance or case. It is also stated that if the Court does deviate from the child support guidelines in place, it is required to consider all relevant factors, including applicable statutes and case law.
Once all factors have been considered, the Court is required to make written findings showing that the application of the child support guidelines would be inappropriate or unjust and the court considered the best interests of the child when determining the amount of child support. The order must also reflect the amount of child support before the deviation and after the deviation.
Jennifer, thank you for being my attorney. I could not have been more pleased with the outcome of my family court hearing. Everything you have done for me throughout this case reflects in the final ruling of the judge. You helped me keep my head together and taught me a lot about myself as a person. I learned so much about my life from observing and listening to you. I will take all the advice you gave me to continue taking responsibility for my choices, continue to put the kids' needs first, and always stay truthful. Your diligence, dedication, and persistence in my case made what seemed impossible, possible. You are a wonderful person and an amazing attorney and I am stronger and more confident because of you.
I just want to again thank the Firm for working with me all that it has. I could not have done anything without everyone's assistance. You, Chris and Stacey have been and continue to provide me with compassion and hard work towards my case. Also a very special thanks to Kip for taking my case in the beginning. Also continued support from him and his dedication to providing me with his expertise in this matter.
After interviewing several law firms, I came across Jennifer Shick, and her firm, who I hired to represent me for my Family Court case. Jennifer has extensive knowledge of the law and is determined to bring the truth to every issue involved within the case. Throughout my case, Jennifer was prepared meticulously as well as went above and beyond all of my expectations. Even when the other party tried to differ from the truth, lie to the Judge, and turn situations around, Jennifer remained attentive and provided substantial evidence to show the judge the facts as well as the proof to support what was the best interests of my children. Additionally, Jennifer helped me endure many difficult experiences, situations and inspired me to remain positive throughout the entirety of my case. Her kindness, compassion, and professionalism helped me through very difficult times and made the process feel a thousand times lighter on my shoulders. She truly has my children and my best interest at heart and I trust her perspective as well as her honesty on each and every aspect of my case. She lessened the burden on my shoulders and even when I felt like the case was not going to go in my favor, Jennifer was open-minded and reassured me that the Judge would, in fact, see the truth, which he did and the case went in my favor. After nine months of court, everything finally came together. I cannot declare how much Jennifer has been an outstanding attorney. She addressed each and every issue with diligence, she cares about her clients and their families. Jennifer genuinely cares about her clients and her dedication to the details of the case was remarkable. Overall, I am extremely pleased with Jennifer’s services and I am truly thankful that I was so blessed to have her represent my children and me. I highly recommend Jennifer as one of the best attorneys in Arizona and if the situation ever arises, I will definitely have her represent my children and me again.
Dear Stacey and Kip, How can I ever thank you enough for helping me through the most difficult time in my life? I couldn't put into words my heartfelt gratefulness. You both were so compassionate and professional at every given moment throughout this process with me. I thank you from the bottom of my heart. You helped me to regain my freedom.
I was a client of Attorney Kevin Park for the dissolution of a divorce in 2016. And since I had never had the need to hire an attorney before for any purpose, I was somewhat apprehensive of the process. But the very calm and professional demeanor of Mr. Park eased my fears. He adeptly answered all my questions and I clearly knew the process and what to expect. And the skilled manner he communicated with opposing counsel was perfect. When it came down to negotiating with my spouse’s counsel, I knew I had selected the best attorney for my situation. What I noticed and appreciated was that he was using just the right amount of pressure with opposing counsel as was necessary. If you find yourself in this situation, you will want a seasoned professional like Mr. Park on your side. I'm very grateful that he was my attorney and not the opposition!
Chris is a smart and aggressive attorney for his clients. Chris always tries to reach a fair settlement of his cases. I’ve represented clients when Chris was the opposing counsel and while he is professional and amicable to work with, he does not back off on what he needs to do for his client
Kevin Park of Hildebrand Law was just what I needed for my divorce. He was very approachable and personable. He was quick to recognize what I needed and provided it quickly and efficiently. I hope to never need a divorce lawyer again, but if I know anyone else who does, I will definitely recommend Kevin.
I feel that Tracey Van Wickler is certainly one of the best family lawyers around. She is logical, intelligent, and truly cares. Tracey always does what is in the clients best interest, does it well, timely and with integrity. She is good at keeping her clients informed as to what is going on and clear in her communication both written and verbally. I have recommended Tracey to other people and will continue to recommend her. I recommended Tracey to someone who was having issues with their ex-wife and his response was, “I know how good she is because I went up against her and she ate me for lunch”. This same person was so impressed with her, he even recommended her to someone else, WOW, that is impressive! I am exceptionally happy with her attention to detail, her ability to explain things in ways that are easy to understand, as well as her ability to keep everyone focused on the most important things. I would recommend Tracey to anyone who may be in need of her services.
The Findings of the Family Court in Support of the Child Support Order
The Family Court did make factual findings regarding the incomes of the parties involved. Father had an income of $3 million per year and Mother had an income of $60,000 per year. The court concluded that this left a significant disparity in financial resources that justified a deviation from the guidelines. The record supports these findings.
Yet the Family Court did not provide any findings of fact on the record supporting its decision to award the amount of $7,500 per month in child support payable to Mother. While the reasoning for the increase in child support can be inferred, when a party invokes Rule 82(A) the appellate court does not employ such inferences. The Court may not affirm the lower court’s ruling unless the trial court clearly states the basis for its ruling.
Arizona Court of Appeals Vacates Child Support Order
While the Family Court has the ability to deviate from the child support guidelines, they must only do so when findings and law support such a deviation. In this case, proof of findings and conclusions of law must be provided upon the filing of a timely request for such. As Jay David Stein (Father) did file a timely request, in this case, the family court was required to provide the facts supporting its substantial deviation from the guidelines. As the court did not provide the requested information, The Arizona Court of Appeals vacated the child support order and remanded the case back to the family court for additional findings.