Kowalski v. Obst
Trial court had the authority to establish a trust from child support paid during minority, some of which may be used to fund higher education. Statutory change did not alter import of Mary L.O..
In Re Marriage of Ayres v. Ayres
Court property deviated from guidelines, where strict application would have resulted in child support of over $130,000 per year. Trial court properly exercised its discretion in finding such support would far exceed any amount necessary to provide for the children in a similar pre-divorce lifestyle, would be detrimental to the childrens’ values and would constitute hidden maintenance.
Luciani v. Montemurro-Luciani
In a case of a high-income payee, the percentage standards presumptively apply, absent payor’s showing of unfairness.
Mary L.O. v. Tommy R.B.
Application of percentage standards in high income case was within court’s discretion to fashion an order serving the best interests of the child.
In Re Marriage of Jacquart v. Jacquart
Court did not misuse discretion by failing to use guidelines in modification case where payor was expending more than what the law might ordinarily require of a high income obligor.
In Re Marriage of Hubert v. Hubert
(1) Although percentage standards cannot give absurd results in high income cases, trial court here failed to articulate why guidelines would be unfair in case where husband earns $1 million per year. (2) Court has discretion to establish trust for post-majority needs for children.
In Re Marriage of Resong v. Vier
Ordering excess child support to be paid into trust for college was abuse of discretion. Court cannot consider post-high school expenses.
In Re Marriage of Parrett v. Parrett
Deviation from percentage standard affirmed for high income father where no basis for need was shown.
Anonymous v. Anonymous
Estevez limited to cases where the parties agree on the appropriate amount of child support.
Kalter v. Kalter
Too much support can be bad for a child.
Mason v. Hall
Trust provision was properly established for New York Yankee ballplayer Melvin Hall in light of the precarious earning capacity of major league baseball players.
In Re Marriage of Hubner v. Hubner
Trial court needs sufficient information to assess child’s needs in high income payor case. Such information includes the amount of the supporting parent’s actual income.
Estevez v. Superior Court
Actor does not have to produce information relating to his finances because he his an “extraordinarily high income earner”.
Johnson v. Superior Court
Estevez limited to cases where the parties agree on the appropriate amount of child support.