| | | | | expected change. The court went to state that a |
| A new California divorce law allows a spouse | | | | change previously accounted for, cannot justify |
| receiving income from child support to seek an | | | | an increase in spousal support. In the end, the |
| increase in his or her spousal support upon the | | | | court held that when the daughter graduated, her |
| maturity of the minor child. This law, (Family Code | | | | father’s child support obligations terminated. |
| §4326), which is set to terminate on January 1, | | | | While the rationale of the Court of Appeals |
| 2011, considers the loss of child support income | | | | makes sense, the new law effectively nullifies |
| incurred by a parent when the child becomes no | | | | Lautsbaugh and seemingly broadens the definition |
| longer eligible for support, (e.g. reaches the age of | | | | of a “material change” to include |
| 18 or graduates high school) to be a “change | | | | previously contemplated events. In addition, the |
| in circumstances” substantial enough to justify | | | | provision interrelates the two types of support, |
| a request to modify their spousal support. | | | | which have been historically separate and should |
| This new law presents a departure from prior | | | | remain that way. |
| court rulings. In a 1999 case, In re Marriage of | | | | Although this current state of the law does not |
| Lautsbaugh (1999) 72 Cal.App.4th 1131, 85 | | | | go so far as to require California family courts to |
| Cal.Rptr.2d 688, a California Appeals Court | | | | now consider modifying a spouse’s support |
| reversed a decision granting a wife a $350 | | | | anytime a change in financial status occurs, it |
| increase in her monthly support payments. The | | | | definitely eases the burden of proof. Whether the |
| wife claimed such an increase was justified | | | | parent will be required to show that their |
| because her daughter had graduated from high | | | | expenses, and not those of the child, justify a |
| school, and was no longer eligible for child support. | | | | change in support, remains to be seen. Whatever |
| In reversing the trial court, the Court of Appeals | | | | the eventual outcome, Family Code §4326 will |
| reasoned that the loss of child support payments | | | | likely be a source of much debate in the coming |
| upon the daughter’s reaching maturity was | | | | years, especially if it remains in effect after |
| contemplated by both parties during the initial | | | | January 2011. |
| divorce proceedings and was therefore an | | | | |