Opinion
J-S57028-16 No. 73 WDA 2016
09-15-2016
A.J.M.M., Appellee v. J.R.M., SR., Appellant
NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37
Appeal from the Order December 16, 2015 in the Court of Common Pleas of Crawford County, Domestic Relations, at No(s): D.R. No. 2011-537 BEFORE: FORD ELLIOTT, P.J.E., SHOGAN, and STRASSBURGER, JJ. CONCURRING MEMORANDUM BY: STRASSBURGER, J.:
Retired Senior Judge assigned to the Superior Court. --------
If I had been sitting as the trial judge, I likely would not have ordered Father to pay for the extremely high equestrian expenses.
However, our standard of review is abuse of discretion, and I cannot find that the trial judge abused his discretion. This is especially true given the age of the children, Pa.R.C.P. 1910.16-5(b)(4), and the fact that Father exercises no partial custody. See Pa.R.C.P. 1910.16-4, Explanatory Comment 2010 ("The basic support schedule incorporates an assumption that the children spend 30% of the time with the obligor and that the obligor makes direct expenditures on their behalf during that time. ... Upward deviation should be considered in cases in which the obligor has little or no contact with the children.").