AI Generated Opinion Summaries

This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.

Facts

• The case involves a dispute between Jonathan Sanchez (Father) and Jocelynne Marquez (Mother) over the modification of a child support order. The core of the dispute centers around the district court's adoption of a hearing officer's report that modified the child support obligations, including the imputation of income to Father and a downward deviation in the child support award.

Procedural History

• District Court of Valencia County: Adopted the hearing officer’s child support modification report, which led to the current appeal.

Parties' Submissions

• Respondent-Appellant (Mother): Argued that the district court abused its discretion by adopting the hearing officer's child support award, erred in awarding Father child support credit for voluntary school tuition payments, and violated procedural rules by not addressing her objections specifically.
• Petitioner-Appellee (Father): [Not applicable or not found]

Legal Issues

• Whether the district court abused its discretion in adopting the child support award recommended by the hearing officer.
• Whether the district court erred in crediting Father with the amount he voluntarily paid for Child’s school tuition from January to May 2021.
• Whether the district court violated Rule 1-053.2(H)(1)(b) by failing to specifically address Mother’s objections.

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals reversed and remanded in part the decision of the district court concerning the child support award and affirmed in part the decision regarding the failure to specifically address Mother’s objections.

Reasons

• The Court of Appeals, consisting of Judges Kristina Bogardus, J. Miles Hanisee, and Jacqueline R. Medina, found that:
  The district court abused its discretion in adopting the child support award that was based on a misapprehension of the law regarding the imputation of income to Father and the application of a downward deviation in the child support award (paras 3-7).
  The Court declined to review Mother's argument regarding the credit for voluntary school tuition payments due to lack of preservation of the issue for appeal (para 8).
  The district court did not violate Rule 1-053.2(H)(1)(b) as it provided Mother an opportunity to address her objections, and the court considered those objections before adopting the hearing officer’s report (paras 9-12).