Betty v. Betty

We granted a discretionary appeal in this case to consider two questions. The first is whether the trial court erred in ruling that the fact that the appellee, Mr. Betty, is the legal custodian of a child by another marriage is a special circumstance under OCGA § 19-6-15 c 61 when Mr. Betty does not pay child support for the child and does not have physical custody of the child. The second question is whether the trial court erred in finding that Mr. Betty’s past due child support obligation to an adult child from a previous marriage is a special circumstance under OCGA § 19-6-15 c 6. We conclude that Mr. Betty’s legal custody of one child, unaccompanied by child support payments or physical custody, does not constitute a special circumstance under § 19-6-15 c 6, and that, on the other hand, Mr. Betty’s past due child support obligation to an adult child does constitute a special circumstance. Because the trial court erred in ruling that Mr. Betty’s status as legal custodian constituted a special circumstance, we reverse the trial court’s ruling on child support, and remand for proceedings consistent with this opinion.

1. Under OCGA § 19-6-15 c 6, a trial court is permitted to deviate from the child support guidelines set forth in § 19-6-15 b if a trial court finds that a party’s support obligations to another household make the “presumptive amount of support either excessive or inadequate.” In considering subsection c 6, we have held that