Opinion
Record No. 0632-93-3
August 31, 1993
FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF BEDFORD COUNTY WILLIAM W. SWEENEY, JUDGE.
(Robert U. Pauley, Jr.; R. Louis Harrison, Jr.; Radford, Wandrei Harrison, on brief), for appellant.
(R. Andrew Davis, on brief), for appellee.
Present: Judges Benton, Coleman and Willis.
Pursuant to Code § 17-116.010 this opinion is not designated for publication.
Frank Ray Witt ("husband") contends that the trial judge erred in including $202 as the monthly amount of allowable employment-related child care expenses in the calculation of the total child support obligation. Husband argues that, because he found a less expensive alternative day care arrangement, Code § 20.108.2(F) required the trial judge to include the lower child care costs in calculating the child support obligation. Upon reviewing the record and briefs of the parties, we conclude that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm the decision of the trial court. See Rule 5A:27.
On appeal, we view the evidence in the light most favorable to the party prevailing below, giving it all reasonable inferences fairly deducible therefrom. Farley v. Farley, 9 Va. App. 326, 328, 387 S.E.2d 794, 795 (1990). When the evidence is so viewed, it proved that the alternative day-care arrangement proposed by husband was enrollment in the local Head Start program. Although that program would have been free due to the parties' income level, it operated less hours and less weeks than did the private day care facility in which the child had been enrolled since June 1990. The Head Start program also did not operate year round. The mother testified that the private day care facility operated at hours that were more compatible with her work schedule.
The trial court found that the two facilities were not comparable and included the costs of the private facility in the calculation of the child support obligation. That finding is not plainly wrong or without evidentiary support. Accordingly, we affirm that decision.
Affirmed.