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 the petitioner, Christina Gonzales, seeking to establish child support for her adult disabled son, Blake, from the respondent, Richard Shaw. Blake, nineteen years old at the time of filing, was determined to have severe disabilities including Chromosome 14, Trisomy Mosaic, aspects of Fragile X syndrome, and a clubbed foot, which significantly impaired his intellectual and adaptive functioning. The district court found that Blake's condition warranted continuing child support under the precedent set by Cohn v. Cohn, which allows for child support to extend beyond the age of majority in cases of disability.

Procedural History

• [Not applicable or not found]

Parties' Submissions

• Petitioner: Argued that the son is a disabled adult in need of continuing child support due to his severe disabilities and inability to live independently or manage basic life skills without support.
• Respondent: Contended that the evidence was insufficient to classify the son as a disabled adult requiring continuing child support, questioned the relevance and timing of the clinical neuropsychologist's report and testimony, argued against the inclusion of the son's Social Security disability funds in the child support calculation, and opposed the award of attorney fees and costs to the petitioner.

Legal Issues

• Whether the evidence was sufficient to find the son is a disabled adult in need of continuing child support.
• Whether the district court erred in relying on the report and testimony from a clinical neuropsychologist in its determination on the issue of continued child support for the son.
• Whether the district court erred in its treatment of the proceeds the son receives as a result of his disabilities from Social Security as part of the child support calculation.
• Whether the district court erred in its award of attorney fees and costs to the petitioner.

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's order setting child support for the adult disabled son and the awarding of attorney fees and costs to the petitioner.

Reasons

• VIGIL, Judge, with HANISEE, J., and KIEHNE, J., concurring: The court found substantial evidence supporting the district court's determination that the son was severely disabled and entitled to continuing child support under Cohn v. Cohn. The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in its child support determinations, including its reliance on expert testimony from Dr. Jonathan R. Kurtyka, Ph.D., and its treatment of the son's Social Security disability funds in the child support calculation. The court also found no abuse of discretion in the award of attorney fees and costs to the petitioner, noting the respondent's failure to engage with the expert's findings and the necessity incurred by the petitioner to substantiate her claim for continuing support for their son (paras 1-27).