Preview:

Oregon Judicial Department Appellate Court Opinions
FILED: November 24, 2004
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF OREGON
In the Matter of the Marriage of
JILL K. BERRY,
Respondent,
and
DOUGLAS L. BERRY,
Appellant,
and
GRAHAM BERRY,
Adult Child Attending School,
Other Respondent. 9405-64470; A116089
Appeal from Circuit Court, Multnomah County.
Merri Souther-Wyatt, Judge.
Argued and submitted May 24, 2004.
Margaret H. Leek Leiberan argued the cause for appellant. With her on the briefs were Beth Mason and
Mason & Associates.
Barry Adamson argued the cause and filed the brief for respondent Jill K. Berry.
No appearance for respondent Graham Berry.
Before Edmonds, Presiding Judge, and Wollheim and Schuman, Judges.
WOLLHEIM, J.
Reversed and remanded for recalculation of child support; otherwise affirmed.
WOLLHEIM, J.
Father appeals from a judgment modifying his child support obligations. We review de novo , ORS

19.415(3) (2001), and reverse and remand for recalculation of child support. (1)
Mother filed a motion for modification of child support and a motion to hold husband in contempt due to
his alleged failure to pay past child support. Mother sought to have the amount of child support increased
based on father's increased income and on the expenses of their eldest son, Graham, who is attending
Tulane University.
file:///C|/Users/Peter/Desktop/Opinions/A116089.htm[4/19/2013 12:02:53 AM] Oregon Judicial Department Appellate Court Opinions
Although mother and father had voluntarily agreed to pay for Graham's schooling for his freshman year, mother wanted father's obligation to pay for Graham's schooling included in father's child support obligation because of his history of noncompliance with prior court orders. Father objected and no longer agreed that Graham should attend a private university.
The trial court's judgment required father to pay the presumed child support amount of $1,857 a month and, "[a]s further child support, the balance of Graham's published educational expenses (tuition, room, board, fees and books) after loans, grants, and scholarships * * *. Consistent with the allocation of income, [mother] shall pay 22.8% and [father] shall pay 77.2%." Tulane University's annual total costs are approximately $35,000.
On appeal, father makes three assignments of error. First, father argues that the trial court did not follow the child support guidelines in modifying his child support obligation. Second, father argues that the trial court erred in ordering him to pay $3,263 in arrearages for Graham's freshman year at Tulane. Finally, father argues that the trial court erred in not considering as part of mother's gross income the value she received from her domestic partner paying their entire monthly mortgage. In response to father's first assignment of error, mother argues that father did not preserve the claims of error or that he invited the errors that he asserts. Alternatively, as to the merits of father's first assignment of error, mother argues that we should reconsider our prior case law interpreting the child support guidelines and that the trial court impliedly complied with them. We do not need to consider father's second and third assignments of error and mother's responses to them because we resolve this case based solely on the first assignment of error.
We begin by addressing whether father preserved his first assignment of error that the judgment modifying his child support obligation violated the guidelines. Mother vigorously argues that father did not preserve the errors of which he complains. We disagree. Father objected to "any child support in excess of the presumptively correct amount as set forth in the guidelines."
Turning to the merits, father argues that the trial court erred in not making the required findings to deviate
from the presumptive child support obligation under the guidelines. ORS 25.280 and former OAR 137

Download A116089.pdf

Oregon Law