From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Vonnahme v. Stephenson

Court of Appeals of Iowa
Nov 23, 2005
710 N.W.2d 258 (Iowa Ct. App. 2005)

Opinion

No. 5-859 / 05-0082

Filed November 23, 2005

Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Carroll County, Gary L. McMinimee, Judge.

A mother appeals from the district court's order increasing her child support obligation. AFFIRMED.

Dan McGrevey, Fort Dodge, for appellant mother.

Thomas Polking of Wilcox, Polking, Gerken, Schwarzkopf Copeland, P.C., Jefferson, for appellee father.

Mark Haverkamp, Council Bluffs, for appellee child support recovery unit.

Considered by Sackett, C.J., and Vogel and Eisenhauer, JJ.


The respondent-appellant, Michelle Stephenson, appeals from the district court order increasing her child support obligation. She contends the court should have deviated from the child-support guidelines. She also contends the petitioner, William Vonnahme, did not meet his burden of proof. On de novo review, we affirm.

The parties have one son, Tucker, born in 1999. In ruling on Michelle's 1999 petition to establish paternity and custody, the court ordered joint legal custody, gave William physical care, ordered Michelle to pay monthly child support of fifty dollars, and ordered William to provide health insurance. Michelle lives with her daughter born in 1993. The child's father died before her birth. In 2004 William requested the Child Support Recovery Unit (CSRU) to review Michelle's child support obligation. See Iowa Code § 252H.13 (2003). The CSRU determined Michelle's monthly child support obligation should be set at $293.73. Michelle contested the decision and the matter was submitted to the district court. See id. § 252H.8.

William participated in the hearing without counsel. William provided copies of his federal tax returns for the three preceding years. Michelle provided an affidavit of financial status. She testified she is the sole support for her daughter, she has Tucker for ninety-nine overnight visits yearly, and her monthly expenses exceed her net income.

The court found a substantial change in circumstances since the 1999 order. In applying the child support guidelines, the court gave Michelle the qualified additional dependent deduction of $135 for her daughter. The court ordered Michelle to pay monthly child support of $293.73, which it calculated according to the guidelines. It did not deviate from the guidelines.

An action to review and adjust child support is an equitable proceeding. 441 Iowa Admin. Code r. 441-99.65(2) (2003). We review de novo. Iowa R. App. P. 6.4.

Michelle contends William did not meet his burden of proof to demonstrate a change in circumstances. See In re Marriage of Robbins, 510 N.W.2d 844, 845 (Iowa 1994). The district court had three years of William's tax returns, his testimony, Michelle's financial affidavit, and her testimony. From that evidence the court could determine Michelle's obligation under the guidelines differed by ten percent or more from her previous obligation. See Iowa Code § 598.21(9) (2003). We conclude William met his burden of proof.

Michelle claims the district court erred in not deviating downward from the child support guidelines because (1) she is the sole support for her daughter, (2) her expenses exceed her income, and (3) she has ninety-nine overnight visitations yearly. She argues her circumstances are unique and justify a downward deviation.

District courts strictly follow the child support guidelines in determining a parent's child support obligation. State ex rel. Miles v. Minar, 540 N.W.2d 462, 464 (Iowa Ct.App. 1995). There is a rebuttable presumption child support determined under the guidelines is correct. In re Marriage of Thede, 568 N.W.2d 59, 61 (Iowa Ct.App. 1997). "Special circumstances can call for an adjustment up or down when necessary to do justice between the parties." In re Marriage of Nelson, 570 N.W.2d 103, 108 (Iowa 1997). Ordinarily, however, the fact that an obligor's actual living expenses make it burdensome to pay support at the guideline level is not sufficient cause for deviating from the guidelines. State ex rel. Dep't of Human Servs. v. Burt, 469 N.W.2d 669, 670 (Iowa 1991). The guidelines already take into account the reasonable living expenses of the noncustodial parent. State ex rel. Weber v. Denniston, 498 N.W.2d 689, 691 (Iowa 1993). Any request for deviation should be viewed with great caution. Nelson, 570 N.W.2d at 108. The guidelines have been applied even when implementing them left the noncustodial parent at the poverty level. See In re Marriage of Axmear, 529 N.W.2d 304, 306 (Iowa Ct.App. 1995).

The district court applied the qualified additional dependent deduction to account for Michelle's support of her daughter. See Iowa Ct. Rule 9.8. Ninety-nine overnight visitations does not meet the minimum number to justify a reduction in child support. See Iowa Ct. Rule 9.9. We find the district court did not err in applying the guidelines without deviation.

AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

Vonnahme v. Stephenson

Court of Appeals of Iowa
Nov 23, 2005
710 N.W.2d 258 (Iowa Ct. App. 2005)
Case details for

Vonnahme v. Stephenson

Case Details

Full title:WILLIAM F. VONNAHME, Petitioner-Appellee, v. MICHELLE L. STEPHENSON…

Court:Court of Appeals of Iowa

Date published: Nov 23, 2005

Citations

710 N.W.2d 258 (Iowa Ct. App. 2005)