Summary
affirming award of dependent exemption to the noncustodial parent where the mother was entitled to earned income credit up through earnings of $25,000, regardless of whether she claimed the child as a dependent.
Summary of this case from In re Marriage of BergOpinion
No. 5-547 / 04-1822
Filed August 17, 2005
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Clinton County, C.H. Pelton, Judge.
The respondent appeals from several provisions of the order entered by the district court in an action to establish paternity, custody, and support. AFFIRMED.
Jennifer Loosemore, Iowa City, appellant pro se.
Jeremy Bates, Clinton, appellee pro se.
Considered by Zimmer, P.J., and Hecht and Vaitheswaran, JJ.
The respondent, Jennifer Loosemore, appeals from several provisions of the district court's ruling on Jeremy Bates's petition to establish paternity, custody, and support. She contends the court erred in granting Jeremy the tax dependency exemption for the parties' minor child. She also contends the visitation schedule established by the court is not in the child's best interests. Finally, she argues the court erred in establishing Jeremy's obligation for past child support.
Jennifer and Jeremy have never been married. They began living together in Iowa and then moved to Wisconsin. Jennifer became pregnant in January 2003. The parties broke up shortly after Jennifer became pregnant, and Jeremy returned to Iowa. The parties' son, Connor, was born October 31, 2003. In January 2004 Jennifer and Connor moved to Iowa.
In July 2004 Jeremy filed a petition which requested the district court to establish paternity, custody, and support, and to address other related matters. Jennifer answered the petition, and temporary orders were entered establishing visitation and support.
Following trial in October 2004, the district court granted the parties joint legal custody of Connor and placed physical care with Jennifer. Jeremy was granted visitation on alternating weekends and holidays as well as three two-week blocks of summer visitation. The court ordered Jeremy to pay child support at the rate of $315 per month based on his current income. The court entered judgment against Jeremy in favor of Jennifer in the amount of $750 for past support and maintenance, and ordered Jeremy to reimburse the State of Iowa for FIP assistance payments to Jennifer in the amount of $1159. Jeremy was also ordered to provide medical insurance for Connor. Finally, the court ordered that Jeremy is entitled to claim the tax dependency exemption for the Connor so long as Jeremy's child support obligation is current.
Our review of paternity actions is generally for the correction of legal error. Mason v. Hall, 419 N.W.2d 367, 369 (Iowa 1988). However, decisions ancillary to the question of paternity, such as custody and support, are reviewed de novo. Id. We give weight to the findings of the trial court, especially when considering the credibility of witnesses, but are not bound by them. Iowa R. App. P. 6.14(6)( g).
Jennifer first contends the court erred in granting Jeremy the tax dependency exemption instead of alternating it between the parents. See Iowa Code § 598.21(4) (2003). Jennifer testified that she is entitled to a federal earned income credit up through earnings of $25,000, regardless of whether she claims Connor as a dependent. She currently earns less than $25,000. Jeremy is employed full-time and will benefit from the exemption. In addition to child support, he is also responsible for medical insurance payments. We conclude the district court acted properly in granting Jeremy the tax dependency exemption for Connor.
Jennifer next contends the visitation schedule established by the court is not in Conner's best interests. She argues the three two-week blocks of summer visitation are not appropriate for a child of Connor's age. She urges instead a summer visitation schedule of two seven-to-ten-day blocks until the child reaches five years of age. When Connor reaches that age, Jennifer argues the summer visitation schedule could be increased to two two-week blocks.
Liberal visitation rights are in the best interests of the child. In re Marriage of Muell, 408 N.W.2d 774, 777 (Iowa Ct.App. 1987). The court shall order liberal visitation rights, where appropriate, which will assure the child the opportunity for the maximum continuing physical and emotional contact with both parents. Iowa Code § 598.41(1) (2003). We conclude the visitation schedule ordered by the district court is equitable and in the best interests of Connor.
Finally, Jennifer contends the court erred in setting the amount of past support Jeremy was ordered to pay her at $750. Iowa Code section 600B.25(1) (2003) provides that a court may order the father to pay amounts the court deems appropriate for the past support and maintenance of the child. Jennifer contends the total amount of past due support is $2835 ($315 per month for the nine-month period from the date of Connor's birth until the court ordered temporary support in July 2004). Jennifer argues Jeremy should be ordered to pay her $1676 for past due support instead of the $750 ordered by the district court. She arrives at this figure by subtracting $1159 (the amount of financial aid provided to Jennifer by the State) from $2835.
The $315 per month permanent child support obligation ordered by the district court was based upon Jeremy's employment with JE Merit at the time of trial. From the time of Connor's birth until May 1, 2004, Jeremy was employed by Collis Company, where he earned less than he does now. The record also reveals that Jeremy's family provided Jennifer with some financial assistance after Jennifer and Connor moved back to Iowa. We conclude the district court's past support award was reasonable under the circumstances and affirm the district court's order.