In re the Marriage of Little,
975 P.2d 108



Facts: H(P) and W(D) divorced in 1995. H was ordered to pay $1,186 per month for the support of his two young children. In 1996, H resigned his commission in the Air Force, that paid a $48,000 salary and yearly benefits, and he chose to enroll full time as a student in Arizona State University College of Law. H petitioned the court to reduce his support to $239 per month. This request was denied on grounds that H voluntarily left his employment to further his own ambitions and that he had failed to consider the needs of his children. The trial court did reduce the amount to $972 per month on the ground that W had acquired a higher paying job. The court of appeals applied a good faith test to determine that the lower court abused its discretion.

Issue: Did the trial court err in rejecting the good faith and strict tests and applying the balancing test to determine whether a voluntary choice to leave employment to attend law school is a substantial change in circumstances to justify a substantial reduction in child support?

Holding: No. Opinion of the court of appeals vacated and decision of the trial court affirmed. The Superior Court, denied petition, and former husband appealed. The Court of Appeals, reversed and remanded. On further appeal, the Supreme Court, held that: (1) intermediate balancing test would be used to determine what effect former husband's decision to forego employment and become full-time student had upon his obligation to pay child support, and (2) former husband was not entitled to downward modification in his child support obligation.

Analysis: A court may modify a child support order on the showing of a substantial, continuing change in circumstances. A court may impute income to a parent up to full earning capacity if the parent's earnings are reduced voluntarily and not for reasonable cause. Sister states have applied one of three tests to determine whether to modify a child support order when the parent voluntarily terminates employment.