The court fixed a maximum reasonable childcare contribution of $110 per day for school-year weekday care provided by the claimant’s mother and disallowed contribution for eight summer 2024 childcare days.
Contempt was dismissed because the applicant failed to prove the allegations beyond a reasonable doubt: the applicant's own email created reasonable doubt about an enforceable mobility restriction, and the applicant had agreed to amended parenting arrangements and professional intervention for the period complained of, precluding a willful breach; the court therefore declined to make a contempt finding.
Source excerpt
Contempt for breach of corollary relief order
Mobility restriction breach
Denial of parenting time
Use of professional services as alternative to contempt
The court varied child support and parenting terms, found no shared custody of S., held T. remained a child until age 19, and refused to cancel spousal arrears.
Interim child and spousal support were ordered, parenting time was increased on a staged schedule, and retroactive support and arrears were left for trial.
The court fixed the parties’ incomes, rejected claims of under-employment and non-credible disclosure, dismissed both s. 7 expense claims, denied summer offset support, and awarded costs to Ms. Koch.
The court held the respondent stood in the place of a parent to M., kept support income at $48,000, cancelled arrears attributable after M.'s 18th birthday, and granted a restraining order.
Respondent's sustained and substantial increase in income (from about $21,000 to about $35,262) since the Corollary Relief Order constituted a material change justifying variation of spousal support; spousal support reduced to zero effective with the applicant's payment on July 26, 2012. Table child support was recalculated using actual incomes for specified periods (resulting in monthly amounts of $1,121 from July–Dec 2011, $1,116 Jan–June 2012, and $1,185 from July 2012–June 2013). A contribution to Samuel's tutoring was ordered ($64/month) under s.7 after finding necessity and reasonablene…
Post-trial family law applications addressed spousal support variation, child support recalculation, access scheduling, and section 7 expenses. Spousal support variation was dismissed.
In a family-law chambers application, the court held the defendant's motion was unnecessary and awarded the plaintiff lump sum costs of $800 inclusive of disbursements.