Fischbach v. Tuttle, 1556

• Decision Date: 18 September 1990
• Docket Number: No. 1556,1556
• Citation: 302 S.C. 555,397 S.E.2d 773
• Court: South Carolina Court of Appeals
• Parties: Gary T. FISCHBACH, Respondent, v. Alma TUTTLE, Appellant. . Heard

Page 773

397 S.E.2d 773

302 S.C. 555

Gary T. FISCHBACH, Respondent, v. Alma TUTTLE, Appellant.

No. 1556.

Court of Appeals of South Carolina.

Heard Sept. 18, 1990.

Decided Oct. 22, 1990.

James E. Whittle, Jr., Aiken, for appellant.

John W. Harte, Aiken, for respondent.

SHAW, Judge:

Respondent Gary T. Fischbach instituted this action against his former wife, appellant Alma Tuttle, seeking to reduce his child support obligation for their minor daughter. From an order granting a reduction in child support, Mrs. Tuttle appeals. We reverse in part and affirm in part.

The parties were married on December 20, 1974 and divorced December 4, 1987. In March 1987, Mrs. Tuttle was awarded custody of the parties' daughter and support in the amount of $1,350 per month pursuant to an action for separate maintenance. At the divorce hearing, heard in October 1987, Dr. Fischbach sought a reduction in the previously ordered child support. This request was denied on the basis that there was no evidence that Dr. Fischbach's income was significantly different from that at the time of the separate maintenance hearing. Dr. Fischbach was, however, allowed to claim the daughter as a dependent for tax purposes.

At the hearing on this matter, Dr. Fischbach admitted his monthly income remained the same as it was in October of 1987. Dr. Fischbach testified Mrs. Tuttle's financial position had strengthened since she had remarried and had purchased a house. He stated his daughter's needs had not changed since 1987.

Mrs. Tuttle testified she remarried in February, 1988. She and her current husband have a child who was four months old at the time of this hearing. When she remarried, Dr. Fischbach's $300 monthly alimony obligation was terminated. Her income has decreased since the October 1987 hearing in that she was attending school and therefore working fewer hours. She also stated her daughter's needs had not changed since 1987.

The trial judge found Dr. Fischbach's income had not changed since the parties' divorce. However, he reasoned that because Mrs. Tuttle remarried and had another child, adding two more people to the household, the daughter's share of basic household expenses had been reduced. He thus ordered a reduction in Dr. Fischbach's child support obligation to $890 monthly. Mrs. Tuttle appeals this reduction.

The issue of child support is subject to continuing review by the family court. Stevenson v. Stevenson, 276 S.C. 475, 279 S.E.2d 616 (1981). Child support may be modified upon a proper showing of a change in either the child's needs or the supporting parent's financial ability. Calvert v. Calvert, 287 S.C. 130, 336 S.E.2d 884 (Ct.App. 1985). To warrant a modification in child support, the change of circumstances...