Bouris and Bouris

Summarized by:

  • Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
  • Area(s) of Law: Family Law
  • Date Filed: 03-02-2016
  • Case #: A158666
  • Judge(s)/Court Below: Duncan, P.J. for the Court; DeVore, J.; & Flynn, J.
  • Full Text Opinion

If a trial court erroneously imputes facts regarding a party's actual income when determining spousal support or child support, then the Court of Appeals will reverse and remand.

Wife appealed a judgment from the trial court awarding her $500 in transitional spousal support, but requiring that she pay $300 in child support, arguing that the trial court erred in determining her ability to pay. In this marriage dissolution, Husband was the primary earner, but Wife also worked a minimum-wage job throughout the 22-year marriage. In the dissolution, both parties agreed that Wife would stop working and attend college to earn a degree in social work. The trial court imputed Wife's capacity to earn a full-time income, but did not provide any supportive evidence, despite contrary evidence presented by Wife. On review, the Court held that the trial court erred by imputing Wife's ability to pay $300 in child support, as there was no evidence she was able to work at all while in school. Reversed and remanded.

Advanced Search