1977, January, Pg. 77. Family Law Newsletter.

6 Colo.Law. 77

Colorado Lawyer

1977.

1977, January, Pg. 77.

Family Law Newsletter

77Vol. 6, No. 1, Pg. 77Family Law NewsletterLast month, in our Newsletter, we focused on custody. This month, the focus will be on recent support decisions.

Reduction in SupportShould a divorced parent have the right to change his profession to something more satisfying though less lucrative and be able to reduce his support payments proportionately?

---Colorado case law indicates that support payments be based upon the earning capability of the non-custodial parent rather than on his actual earnings. Thus, when a non-custodial parent chose to "cop out" to the mountains, his support liability was still based upon the standard of living of the family and the ability of the father to earn.

---Similarly, a Virginia court ruled that a physician-husband would have to leave his teaching position and go into private practice which would be at least twice as lucrative in order to pay necessary alimony and child support so that the wife could maintain the level at which she became accustomed during the marriage. This ruling was made in spite of a showing that his long-term career plans would be best served by remaining in the teaching position.

---Apparently contrary to the above trends, a recent article in the BNA Family Law Reporter addressed the problem of a divorced parent who in good faith sought to lower his support payments by a reduction in income and thus impose lower standards of living on his children. The article discusses guidelines and standards that could be used by the courts in reducing support.

---An Illinois Appellate Court approached a similar problem with regard to an unemployed ex-husband, and concluded that "good-faith" should be the standard. The Court found that if the unemployment was in good faith, he should be given temporary relief from support payments for a reasonable period and be given a reasonable time to show that his continued unemployment is in good faith.

Emancipation and MajorityThe age of majority for purposes of support after a dissolution of marriage still seems to plague us as we argue about ages eighteen and twenty-one. The Colorado Uniform Dissolution of Marriage Act, C.R.S. 1973, § 14-10-101 et seq. has no express language. But take a look at C.R.S. 1973, § 2-4-401(6) defining minor: "Any person who has...