Dodson v. Walraven

The trial court erred in characterizing the financial support that the appellant received from his parents as a monthly lump-sum gift income of $3K for purposes of determining his child support obligation, as there was no evidence of the amount of regular, ongoing gift income.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

Following a bench trial, Douglas Dodson appeals from an order establishing custody of his minor child and his child support obligations to Sarah Walraven, the mother of the child. Dodson contends that the trial court erred by 1 attributing to his monthly income $3,000 to reflect support he received from his parents while he lived with them; 2 awarding back child support of $9,550; and 3 awarding Walraven $5,000 in attorney fees under OCGA § 9-15-14 b. For the reasons that follow, we affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand.

The record shows that Dodson and Walraven dated for a period of time and conceived a child born out of wedlock in October 2007. By August 2008, the couple was no longer together, and Dodson filed a verified petition in the superior court alleging himself to be the father and seeking a determination of paternity, legitimation, custody, and visitation. Walraven answered, opposing the petition, and filed counterclaims to establish paternity and child support in the event of legitimation. Discovery and paternity testing ensued confirming Dodson’s paternity, and a bench trial began on the merits of Dodson’s petition. Because the trial had to be continued for scheduling reasons, in February 2010, the trial court entered a temporary order establishing Dodson’s visitation, which was supervised by Dodson’s parents initially and unsupervised thereafter. The temporary order also established child support payments from Dodson to Walraven in the sum of $831 per month.1

Dodson v. Walraven

The trial court erred in characterizing the financial support that the appellant received from his parents as a monthly lump-sum gift income of $3K for purposes of determining his child support obligation, as there was no evidence of the amount of regular, ongoing gift income.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report