Appeals Court Remands Child Support Ruling: Circuit Court Ordered to Consider Current Employment Status and Income for Child Support Imputation Purposes

In the case of Broadhead v. Broadhead, the Virginia Court of Appeals, in a published opinion, held that the trial court erred in ruling that the father was voluntarily underemployed as compared to his employment at the time of the initial child support award, instead of considering his current employment.  Furthermore, the trial court erroneously considered the father’s income at the time of the initial child support award, when he was making considerably more money, instead of his current income.

On the first issue, the Appeals Court found that the father did not voluntarily leave his positions as general counsel at Capital One or CitiFinancial, where he was making almost double his current income.  Against his consent, he was laterally moved within Capital One to a position for which he was not trained nor experienced, and then let go.  In between his employment with Capital One and CitiFinancial, the father started his own company, receiving no salary, but rather, he lived on his severance pay from Capital One.  Upon being employed with CitiFinancial, the father was required to work in Baltimore Monday through Friday, away from his home and children in Richmond.  After attempting to telecommute two days per week so he could spend time with his children, CitiFinancial required the father to revert back to working in Baltimore Monday through Friday, or lose his job.  Not wanting to give up his time with his children, the father chose to return to working for himself at the company he created, wherein his income was almost half of what he could have earned with Capital One or CitiFinancial.  The trial court erred in finding that the father was voluntarily underemployed based on his employment at the time of the initial child support award, instead of considering his current employment and the circumstances leading up to it.

Secondly, and based on the first incorrect ruling, the trial court erroneously considered the father’s income at the time of the initial child support award in imputing income to him, instead of using the income he is, or should be, making currently.  Once the trial court reviews the issue of whether or not the father is currently voluntarily underemployed, then the correct imputation of income should be determined.