Opinion
No. 2-956 / 02-0471
Filed February 12, 2003
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Glenn E. Pille, Judge.
William Vannausdle appeals the decision of the district court which requires him to contribute to the college expenses of his child. REVERSED.
Joseph G. Bertogli, Des Moines, for appellant.
A. Eric Neu of Neu, Minnich, Comito Neu, P.C., Carroll, for appellee.
Considered by Huitink, P.J., and Mahan and Vaitheswaran, JJ.
William Vannausdle appeals the decision of the district court which requires him to contribute to the college expenses of his child. He claims the court did not take adequate consideration of the child's resources and included excessive expenses in its calculation. We reverse.
I. Background Facts Proceedings
Janet and William Vannausdle were divorced on February 14, 1988. This case involves one of their two children, Abby, who was born on September 17, 1982. Abby began attending Iowa State University in August 2001. Janet filed a petition seeking to have William contribute to Abby's education costs. William's annual income is about $51,000, while Janet's is about $11,000.
The district court determined Abby's expected education costs were $11,610 per year. The court deducted her grants and scholarships of $6300 and the amount she received from a work-study program, $1800. The parents were ordered to contribute to the remaining amount of $3500, with William responsible for $2532.50 and Janet responsible for $877.50 per year. William appealed.
II. Standard of Review
Our scope of review in this equitable action is de novo. Iowa R.App.P. 6.4. In equity cases, especially when considering the credibility of witnesses, the court gives weight to the fact findings of the district court, but is not bound by them. Iowa R.App.P. 6.14(6)( g).
III. Merits
We first consider the applicable law in this case. On the issue of college expenses, the law in effect at the time of the dissolution decree should govern. See In re Marriage of Sojka, 611 N.W.2d 503, 505 (Iowa 2000). The parties here were divorced in 1988. We determine section 598.21(5A), which was enacted in 1997, does not apply in this case.
We consider Abby's college expenses under section 598.1(2) (1987). In assessing a parent's obligation, we consider (1) the ability of the child for college, (2) the age of the child, (3) the financial condition of the parents, and (4) whether the child is self-sustaining. In re Marriage of Linberg, 462 N.W.2d 698, 702 (Iowa Ct.App. 1990). We have a duty to carefully balance the needs of the child with the financial assets and earnings of the parents. In re Marriage of Byall, 353 N.W.2d 103, 109 (Iowa Ct.App. 1984).
Generally, a parent's responsibility for a child's college expenses is limited to tuition, room, board, and books. In re Marriage of Dolter, 644 N.W.2d 370, 373 (Iowa Ct.App. 2002); In re Marriage of Maher, 596 N.W.2d 561, 564 (Iowa Ct.App. 1999). Usually we do not require a parent to pay a child's personal expenses, such as clothing or telephone bills. See In re Marriage of Springer, 538 N.W.2d 897, 901 (Iowa Ct.App. 1995). For our purposes we consider Abby's estimated annual college expenses to be $8862, which includes tuition, fees, room, board, books and supplies.
We next consider the question of Abby's resources. If a child is self-sustaining, support towards college expenses is not mandatory. In re Marriage of Misol, 445 N.W.2d 411, 414 (Iowa Ct.App. 1989). Where a child has substantial assets in his or her own name, the court may order these assets to be used for college expenses. In re Marriage of Steele, 502 N.W.2d 18, 22 (Iowa Ct.App. 1993).
The evidence shows that on an annual basis Abby received grants and scholarships of $6300. She also received loans of $3475, and was eligible to receive $1800 from a work-study program. Additionally, Abby had received one-time scholarships of $2250. It is clear Abby's financial aid package of more than $12,000 per year exceeds her costs. We reverse the decision of the district court requiring William to contribute to Abby's college expenses.
Janet seeks attorney fees for this appeal. We determine each party should pay his or her own appellate attorney fees. Costs of this appeal are assessed to Janet.