Opinion
No. FA 00-0121354 S
June 1, 2007
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION
I. STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Defendant filed a Motion to Determine Support Credit, postjudgment. The matter proceeded to hearing. Counsel represented both parties. The plaintiff did not appear. Plaintiff filed a Motion For Attorneys Fees.
II. ISSUES
What is defendant's child support obligation? What is defendant's support credit?
III. STATEMENT OF FACTS
The court finds the following facts proven by a preponderance of the evidence. Judgment entered dissolving plaintiff's and defendant's marriage on June 6, 2001. The minor child, Zachary Snow, was the only issue of the marriage. Prior to August 18, 2004, the minor child resided with the defendant. On or around August 18, 2004, by agreement, the minor child traveled to Texas to live with the plaintiff. The parties agreed to the following child support arrangement which the Court incorporated by reference into the decree:
The parties acknowledge that the plaintiff mother owes an arrearage for child support in the approximate amount of $ 4,000. The exact arrearage amount as of August 15, 2004 shall be determined by the parties and incorporated into the calculations in paragraph 7 below. (Paragraph 5 of Stipulation of the Parties dated August 18, 2004.)
The parties agree that the current child support order and arrearage be terminated effective immediately. (Paragraph 6 of Stipulation of the Parties dated August 18, 2004.)
The defendant father's child support obligation shall commence immediately, however, the payment amount shall be determined at a later date with orders retroactive to August 23, 2004. The defendant father's child support payments once the amount has been determined, shall be credited against the child support arrearage existing as of the date of the filing of the Motion To Modify Judgment, August 15, 2004. Payments to plaintiff mother shall commence as soon as the arrearage is paid in full and shall be secured by contingent wage execution. The child support order shall take into account the cost of transportation for travel for visitation. (Paragraph 7 of Stipulation of the Parties dated August 18, 2004.)
A Support Enforcement Division Audit shows that as of February 9, 2007, the plaintiff's arrearage totaled $ 3,100.00. Support Enforcement calculated the arrearage by multiplying $ 390.00 by the 13 months in which the plaintiff did not make child support payments to the defendant (August 1, 2003 through August 18, 2004). In calculating the arrearage, Support Enforcement also took into account an arrearage which existed before August 4, 2003 and other child support payments credited to plaintiff between August 1, 2003 and February 9, 2007.
Defendant is a police officer. His gross weekly wage is $ 1,126.73. His net weekly wage is $ 779.00. His gross weekly salary in August 2004 was approximately $ 953.93.
Defendant moves the court to calculate a child support credit based on the stipulation and based on the plaintiff's alleged misrepresentation of her income prior to August 2001. In 2001, the plaintiff's child support obligation was $ 300.00 per week less than her obligation in 2004. Defendant claims the plaintiff misrepresented her income in 2001 and that the court should calculate his child support credit based on the job which he claims the plaintiff knew she would have once she left Connecticut. After leaving Connecticut, the plaintiff took a position as a contractor with the Dallas Morning News and also worked for a pet salon which her second husband owns. Plaintiff had net earnings from all sources of $ 249,024.00 between January 2001 and January 25, 2005. Based on net earnings, plaintiff's average yearly net income during those years was $ 62,256.00 and average weekly net income was $ 1,197.23. However, in a financial affidavit dated July 2004, plaintiff claimed a weekly gross income of $ 330.00 and a weekly net income of $ 295.00. Before leaving Connecticut, the plaintiff was employed as a secretary for Eastern Connecticut State University, classification CL-16. If she had retained in the position, her gross annual salary today would be $ 51,414.00.
By agreement of the parties on February 13, 2007, defendant pays plaintiff $ 140.00 per week in child support pending the court's ruling.
IV. PRINCIPLES OF LAW
"Where a judgment incorporates a separation agreement, the judgment and agreement should be construed in accordance with the laws applied to any contract . . . Where the language of the contract is clear and unambiguous, the contract is to be given effect according to its terms." Kline v. Kline, 101 Conn.App. 402, 407 (2007), quoting Russell v. Russell, 95 Conn.App. 219, 221 (2006). "Although parties might prefer to have the court decide the plain effect of their contract contrary to the agreement; contracts voluntarily and fairly made should be held valid and enforced in the courts." Kline at 411 (emphasis in the original omitted) quoting Tallmadge Bros., Inc. v. Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P., 252 Conn. 479, 505-06 (2000). "Courts do not unmake bargains unwisely made. Absent other infirmities, bargains moved on calculated considerations, and whether provident or improvident, are entitled nevertheless to sanctions of the law." Id.
V. ANALYSIS
The language of paragraph 1 of the agreement states the parties will calculate the arrearage owed by plaintiff as of August 15, 2004. It further states that the parties will calculate the amount of the arrearage and incorporate the figure into paragraph 7. Paragraph 2 terminates the child support order and arrearage owed by plaintiff as of August 15, 2004. Paragraph 3 required defendant's child support obligation to begin immediately, but deferred determination of the amount of the support until a later date. Once the court determines the amount, the parties agreed the orders would be retroactive to August 23, 2004. Defendant's child support obligation would be credited against the plaintiff's arrearage as of August 15, 2004.
According to the stipulation, the defendant's support obligations were to begin immediately on August 18, 2004. Plaintiff's child support obligation and arrearage were to cease accruing on August 18, 2004. Therefore, the stipulation's language supports the conclusion that the parties intended to use their incomes as of August 2004 in calculating child support obligations. The arrearage plaintiff owed as of August 15, 2004 was $ 5,850.00. After carefully weighing the evidence adduced at the hearing, the court finds the plaintiff's net weekly income as of August 15, 2004 was $ 1,197.23. If defendant began paying child support in August 2004, his obligation would have been approximately $ 123.00 per week. If defendant began paying child support of $ 123.00 per week in August 2004, he would have paid approximately $ 9,163.50 through May 2007. With the credit, the obligation decreases to $ 3,313.50 through May 2007.
VI. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Defendant's child support obligation as of August 15, 2004 is $ 123.00 per week. His credit as of August 15, 2004 is $ 5,850.00. Defendant's child support obligation, pursuant to the agreement through May 2007, is $ 3,313.50 less payments made since August 15, 2004.
VII. JUDGMENT
Defendant's motion is granted. Plaintiff's motion is denied.