Statutory guidelines regulate the determination of child support in California. Cal. Fam. Code §§4050-4203; In re Marriage of de Guigne (2002) 97 Cal.App.4th, 1353 1359, citing In re Marriage of Fini (1994) 26 Cal.App.4th 1033, 1040. According to IRMO of de Guigne, supra 97 Cal.App.4th at 1359, the guideline amount of child support, is calculated by applying a mathematical formula to the relative incomes of the parents, is presumptively correct. Citing Cal. Fam. Code §§4055, 4057, subd. (a). Pursuant to Cal. Fam. Code §4057, subd. (b), states that presumption may be rebutted by "admissible evidence showing that application of the formula would be unjust or inappropriate in the particular case, consistent with the principles set forth in Section 4053..."
Pursuant Cal. Fam. Code §§4053, the court's main concern in adhering to or departing from the guideline amount must be the interests of the children. In IRMO de Guigne, the trial court awarded child support in an amount three times greater than the guideline provided. The court in IRMO de Guigne relied on Cal. Fam. Code Section 4057, subdivision (b)(5) as the basis for the departure. That provision, according to the Guigne court, permits deviation from the guideline if the court finds that applying the guideline formula would be unjust or inappropriate due to the special circumstances of the particular case. IRMO Guigne, supra, 97 Cal.App.4th at 1360.
In IRMO Guigne, the trial court in a dissolution of marriage proceeding entered an order setting child and spousal supporting in amounts exceeding the husband's total monthly income. The husband in that case was born into wealth and social prominence and had never worked during the marriage, financing the family's lavish lifestyle through investment income of $240,000 per year and the liquidation of family assets. The family's annual household expenses averaged $450,000. The trial court ordered husband to pay $15,000 per month in child support and $12,500.00 per month in spousal support. The guideline amount pursuant to Family Code section 4050 et seq. for child support based on the husband's income was $4,844 per month. The court of appeal held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in setting child and spousal support in amounts that exceeded the husband's total monthly income because substantial evidence supported the conclusion that the husband's extensive property holdings and relatively meager investment income were special circumstances pursuant to Cal. Fam. Code §4057; thus permitting an upward deviation from support guidelines. The evidence showed that throughout the marriage, the husband had chosen to live on money beyond that generated by investments. Therefore, it was inappropriate that his support obligation be based on that investment income alone, compelling the children to live in rental housing while he lived in his ancestral mansion and sheltered and benefited from substantial assets that produced no income.
The court of appeal held that under these circumstances there was nothing improper in requiring support payments from the husband's separate property, particularly since the marriage produced no community property.
That court found that the guideline child support would not serve the interests of the de Guigne children and that those interests were best protected by shielding the children as much as possible from a drastic reduction in their standard of living. Id.
~Elizabeth Briceno-Velsco, Esq.
Law Offices of Vincent W. Davis & Associates
