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 Shawn P. Burns (Father) and Barbara C. Burns (Mother) regarding the modification of Father's child support obligation and the removal of their two minor children's belongings from Father's home. Following their divorce, which granted Father primary physical custody of the children, both parties contested custody and child support, leading to an arbitration award that established a 50/50 time-sharing schedule and required Father to pay Mother $1,094 a month in child support. Mother sought to vacate the arbitration award and later filed motions to modify child support and to remove the children's possessions from Father's home, both of which were denied by the district court (paras 2-5).

Procedural History

• June 2014: Father initiated divorce proceedings.
• April 18, 2016: The final decree granted Father primary physical custody of the children.
• May 4, 2017: Parties agreed to resolve disputes through binding arbitration.
• October 24, 2017: Arbitrator entered its award, giving Father sole legal custody and establishing a 50/50 time-sharing schedule.
• November 3, 2017: Mother filed a motion to vacate the arbitration award.
• April 6, 2018: District court upheld the arbitrator’s decision on child support.
• April 4, 2018: Mother filed a motion to modify child support.
• July 2018: District court held a hearing to calculate child support and found no modification was warranted.
• August 6, 2018: District court denied Mother's motion for reconsideration.
• September 2018: Mother filed a motion to remove children's possessions from Father's home, which was denied without a hearing.

Parties' Submissions

• Mother: Argued that the district court relied upon improper information in determining the monthly child support award and erred in not scheduling a hearing for her motion to remove the children's possessions from Father's home.
• Father: [Not applicable or not found]

Legal Issues

• Whether the district court erred in denying Mother's motion to modify the amount of monthly child support paid by Father to Mother.
• Whether the district court erred in denying Mother's motion to remove the children's belongings from Father's home without a hearing.

Disposition

• The New Mexico Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's denial of Mother's motions regarding the modification of child support and the removal of the children's possessions from Father's home (para 1).

Reasons

• Per B. Zamora, J. (Linda M. Vanzi, J., and Jacqueline R. Medina, J., concurring):
  The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to modify child support. It correctly applied the child support guidelines, considering both parents' 2017 tax returns and a 50/50 time-sharing schedule. The court found that the recalculation did not produce at least a 20 percent increase or decrease in the monthly support amount, which is required for a modification under NMSA 1978, Section 40-4-11.1 (2008) (paras 6-12).
  The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to remove the children's possessions from Father's home without a hearing. The court found that the children had lived primarily with both parents at various times and there was no reason to believe this arrangement would change. Furthermore, Mother did not provide any legal authority to support her argument that the district court acted unconstitutionally or violated the rules of evidence (paras 13-13).