| Determining a parent's obligation to support a child in | | | | However, the court granted the mother 100 percent |
| California is pretty cut and dry in most cases. | | | | timeshare of the adult child, which is a significant |
| However, as the parties in a recent published case | | | | factor in California, as the amount of time a parent |
| learned, determining a parent's obligation to pay child | | | | has responsibility for a child impacts the amount of |
| support for an adult child will usually depend on the | | | | child support to be paid. Obviously, the lower court |
| particular facts of the case. | | | | had bought into mother's argument that she had |
| In Marriage of Edwards, a family court determined | | | | primary care and responsibility of the adult child. |
| that a father's obligation to pay support to his | | | | Fortunately for the father, the Court of Appeal was |
| ex-wife continued, even though the child was an | | | | not persuaded by mom's argument, and reversed the |
| adult and was attending a state university. The | | | | lower court's decision to order guideline child support. |
| parties had previously stipulated that the father | | | | The Court of Appeal agreed held that ordering |
| would continue to pay child support after the child | | | | guideline child support under the circumstances would |
| became an adult and agreed to split the child's college | | | | be unjust and inappropriate. Furthermore, based on |
| tuition. Under California law, the father's obligation to | | | | the facts presented, the court specifically found that |
| pay child support would have ended when their son | | | | the adult child was not in the mother's primary care |
| attained the age of 18 and graduated high school. But | | | | and responsibility. |
| for reasons not mentioned within the decision, he | | | | In rendering its' decision, the Court distinguished the |
| agreed to pay child support until their son reached | | | | case of In Re Marriage of Drake (1997) 53 |
| the age of 25. | | | | Cal.App.4th 1139 where the guideline formula was |
| Several years after entering into the agreement, the | | | | applicable to child support for a mentally incapacitated |
| father filed an Order to Show Cause for modification | | | | adult child whose mother took full responsibility for his |
| of the child support order, arguing that it was unjust | | | | situation and care. |
| and inappropriate for him to continue to have to pay | | | | An obvious lesson from this case is that the court will |
| support, since he had a significant decrease in income | | | | look to the parent who has responsibility of the child |
| and the child was not living with the mother. | | | | in determining the child's custodial parent. In a case |
| Furthermore, the father argued that the child was | | | | where the child is an adult it is possible that neither |
| not longer in the care and custody of the mother, | | | | parent may qualify. |
| since he lived at the university and had received a | | | | This case is also an eye opener to those who enter |
| sizeable financial aid packet from the state. | | | | into agreements for the continued support of an |
| Mother, on the other hand, argued that their adult | | | | adult child. We can see how a parent may get off of |
| son was still within her primary care, given that the | | | | the hook by filing a modification of child support, |
| son's "stuff" was still at her house, he used the | | | | when it becomes apparent that the other parent is |
| house to receive mail, he listed the house as his | | | | no longer responsible for the child. In other words, |
| address to the university, and he came home for | | | | these types of stipulations and orders may be more |
| extended visits during the school's breaks. | | | | modifiable then what we previously imagined. Thus, |
| Consequently, the mother argued that it was not | | | | parties should be careful not to bargain away |
| unjust or inappropriate for the court to order the | | | | significant rights on behalf of continued support of an |
| father to continue to pay guideline child support. | | | | adult child. |
| The family court agreed with the mother and | | | | On the other hand, the fact that the adult child |
| refused to depart from the guideline formula for | | | | attends college does not mean that an order will not |
| calculating child support. The lower court found that | | | | be enforceable. In a case where the adult child |
| there was no change of circumstances, warranting a | | | | continues to live with a parent, while attending a local |
| departure from the guideline formula. The court | | | | college, the parent is still primarily responsible for the |
| proceeded to calculate child support based on the | | | | child, and the court would probably enforce the type |
| guideline formula and lowered the child support | | | | of stipulation entered into by Mr. and Ms. Edwards. |
| payment, based on father's decreased income. | | | | Law Offices of Donald P. |