▶ Video explainer coming soon
The appeals court said no. It ruled that adding the $18,000 in household contributions to Cindy's income was an improper use of discretion. Judges can impute income from things like job history or earning potential. But this money didn't fit that standard under the circumstances of this case. The court reversed the lower court's order on this point. It sent the case back to the Family Court in Suffolk County. That court must now recalculate Cindy's child support obligation without counting that $18,000. In the meantime, the court set a temporary support amount of $87.77 per week.
David and Cindy Bram divorced in 2017. Cindy had custody, and David paid child support. Later, a court gave David sole custody instead. David then asked the court to end his support payments and order Cindy to pay support. A Support Magistrate agreed and set Cindy's support at $281 per week. This was based on treating her yearly income as $59,004. Cindy objected. A judge lowered that number, deciding her income was $36,513.96. This included her actual wages plus $18,000 a year in money that another man—father of her other three children—gave her for household bills. Cindy's new support amount became $175.54 per week. She appealed that decision.
The question was whether the $18,000 in household help from this third party should count as Cindy's 'income' for child support math. Courts can sometimes add, or 'impute,' extra income beyond a paycheck. But this power has limits. The appeals court had to decide if including this specific contribution was fair and supported by the facts.
This ruling reminds courts that not every dollar coming into a household counts as a parent's income for child support. Contributions from other people in someone's life aren't automatically added in. Courts must have real support in the record before imputing extra income to a parent.
Talk to a licensed family law lawyer in New York.