Beck v. Jaeger
| Decision Date | 10 October 1979 |
| Docket Number | CA-CIV,No. 2,2 |
| Citation | 604 P.2d 18,124 Ariz. 316 |
| Parties | Ann BECK, Petitioner/Appellee, v. John W. JAEGER, Respondent/Appellant. 3173. |
| Court | Arizona Court of Appeals |
Ettinger & Deckter, P. C. by Louis L. Deckter and Nathan A. Parkey, Tucson, for respondent/appellant.
Was it an abuse of discretion to increase support payments for two minor children of the parties from $125 to $225 per month? Appellant contends that it was. We disagree and affirm.
The parties were divorced in January 1974, and pursuant to their agreement, appellant was required to pay $62.50 monthly for each child. Approximately 31/2 years later, appellee petitioned for modification. The children were then 10 and 8. At the conclusion of a lengthy hearing, the court entered findings of fact and conclusions of law and ordered the increase of $100 per month.
We agree with appellant that a prerequisite to modification of a support order is a showing of changed circumstances which are substantial and continuing. A.R.S. Sec. 25-327(A); In re Marriage of Rowe, 117 Ariz. 474, 573 P.2d 874 (1978). A determination as to the sufficiency of changed circumstances is a matter within the sound discretion of the trial court and the reviewing court will not interfere if there is competent evidence to show a change of circumstances. Scott v. Scott, 121 Ariz. 492, 591 P.2d 980 (1979).
The record reflects sufficient evidentiary support for the trial court's finding of changed circumstances. It expressly found, and such finding is not challenged, that the children's needs were at least $300 per month.
Appellant complains that he is required to bear 75% Of the support burden whereas appellee's burden is only 25%.
There is a marked contrast, however, between the amount of his earnings and those of his former spouse. She was earning approximately $600 per month whereas his 1977 income was $15,362 and his estimated 1978 income was between $15,500 and $16,500. Appellant's earnings had substantially increased from the time the parties agreed to $125 monthly for child support. In 1973 he had earned only $6,647 and in 1974, only $2,534. Appellee testified that she had agreed to the $125 monthly because at that time appellant had very little income and a great many debts, and she felt "that it would be unreasonable and probably impossible to get anymore money anyway, but unreasonable to ask for more than $125 under the circumstances." This evidence could properly be considered by the trial court in determining the existence of a change of circumstances. In re Marriage of Rowe, supra.
It is a matter of common knowledge that the cost of living has substantially increased since 1973. Inasmuch as appellant's ability to pay more child support was shown, it was proper for the trial court to consider the increase in the general cost of living as a factor in determining the need for increased child support payments. See Annot., 89 A.L.R.2d 7, Sec. 23 and cases cited therein. Furthermore, the trial...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Shtyrkova v. Gorbunov
...703 P.2d 546, 547 (App. 1985) (fact pools may become dirty without negligence generally known in jurisdiction); Beck v. Jaeger, 124 Ariz. 316, 317, 604 P.2d 18, 19 (App. 1979) (noting substantial cost-of-living increase since 1973 "a matter of common knowledge"). We therefore examine whethe......
-
Scott v. Neal, 1 CA-CV14-0636 FC
..."The obligation to pay child support is primary and other financial obligations are secondary." A.R.S. § 25-501(c); Beck v. Jaeger, 124 Ariz. 316, 317 (App. 1979). Accepting as true that Father properly attributes the statement to the trial court judge, it is not an inaccurate statement of ......
-
Cummings v. Cummings
... ... The dissent, drawing an analogy between gifts from grandparents and the income of a new spouse, cites Beck v. Jaeger, 124 Ariz. 316, 604 P.2d 18 (App.1979), for the proposition that when a former wife remarries, the income of her new spouse "has no bearing ... ...
-
Brevick v. Brevick, 2
... ... Beck" v. Jaegar, 124 Ariz. 316, 604 P.2d 18 (App.1979). Cf. Scott v. Scott, 121 Ariz. 492, 591 P.2d 980 (1979) (modification of spousal maintenance) ... \xC2" ... ...