Johnson v. Johnson (Wyoming 2020)
Overtime income can’t be considered as part of gross income unless it was earned in the statutory timeframe and is reasonably expected to continue. The mother and father divorced. They had four children. During the 2018 trial, the mother argued the father was voluntarily underemployed. While the parents were married the father regularly worked overtime, but he stopped in 2015. She argued his income should be based on his income for 2013 and 2104 when he has regularly working overtime. The trial court agreed and set support accordingly. The father appealed the child support award along with other provisions of the divorce decree. The Supreme Court reversed the child support award. The Court found Wyoming statute was clear and unambiguous as to the inclusion of overtime in income for child support. For overtime to be included, it must have been earned in the preceding twenty-four-month period and must be expected to consistently continue. The Court found the trial court abused its discretion and reversed the case.