In Re Marriage of Bjorgo v. Bjorgo
Courts look to taxable income when determining ability to pay child support. Therefore, Sub S distributions, including the portion used to pay tax obligations, are properly considered in determining gross income.
Derleth v. Cordova
Although wife failed to preserve argument for appeal, court can exclude fringe benefits for health, dental and vision insurance from husband’s income as he had to maintain this insurance and pay the premiums until the children reached the age of majority.
Kanehl v. Pitel
Trial court did not have to find shirking to impute income given the flexibility of the father’s income.
Callen v. Callen
Trial court did not have to find shirking to impute income given the flexibility of the father’s income.
Lyman v. Lyman
Settlement from wrongful termination of employment lawsuit was income available for child support.
In Re Marriage of Jarman v. Welter
Court commissioner and trial court incorrectly excluded overtime income as a general policy. Overtime income can be excluded if it would be unfair to the parties or other factors support exclusion.
In Re Marriage of Derr v. Derr
A non-cooperative party cannot be heard to complain when a court approximates income available to support.
In Re Marriage of Winters v. Winters
undistributed earnings, these earnings are not available for child support.
In Re Marriage of Winkler v. Winkler
Trial court property exercised its discretion by ordering child support to be paid from lump-sum backdrop pension payment.
In Re Marriage of Weiler v. Boerner
Trial court erroneously exercised its discretion by holding open child support based on wife’s enhanced education benefit.
In Re Marriage of Carpenter v. Mumaw
When determining the income of the sole owner of a corporation, the court may disregard the labels attached by the owner and consider corporate profits in order the determine the owner’s true income status.
In Re Marriage of Raz v. Brown
Repayment by company owned by Raz of a loan to Raz was income available for child support.
In Re Marriage of Cook v. Cook
Military retired pay may be considered as income for purposed of calculating child support.
In Re Marriage of Lellman v. Mott
Sufficient evidence existed to support trial court’s finding that payor enjoyed a substantially higher income than disclosed on financial disclosure.
In Re Marriage of Maley
Where sale price of asset was equal to or less than the value placed on asset at the time of divorce the proceeds of the sale are not income for the purposes of child support.
In Re Marriage of Grohmann v. Grohmann
HSS 80 defines gross income as all income from whatever source derived. If husband is obligated to report trust income as is own, then, regardless of whether he receives distributions from the trust, 17% of the trust income is payable as child support.
In Re Paternity of Ashleigh N. H.
(1) Per diem in excess of expenses in income available for child support (2) Court did not abuse its discretion by not adding back depreciation to rental properties (3) Court erred in reducing back support because of lack of visitation and because father started the paternity action – support and visitation are separate issues.
In Re Marriage of Zimmerman v. Zimmerman
Absence of mortgage does not, per se, translate into imputed income under Wis. Adm. Code sec. HSS 80.02(14)
In Re Marriage of Weston v. Holt
In setting child support for serial family payor, gross income means all income derived from any source and realized in any form. The only reductions are public assistance and child and spousal support from previous marriages.
In Re Marriage of DeLaMatter v. DeLaMatter
No error by court in including overtime in husband’s income where there is evidence in the record that he earned overtime income on a regular basis.
- 1
- 2