In re Marriage of Poggi (Kansas 2020)
A district court’s decision has the discretion to apply the extended income formula for child support and findings are not required. In this high-income case, there were three child support orders: temporary, final judgement, and in a post-trial memorandum order. In the final judgment, the district court calculated support using the extended income formula and recalculated the temporary support based on the evidence presented at trial. The father filed a post-trial motion to modify support. In the memorandum order, the district court modified support based on evidence presented during the post-trial hearing and gave the father credit for direct expenses even though he hadn’t made a specific request. The father appealed, and the mother cross-appealed. The appellate court affirmed all provisions of the order. Initially, it found that the father didn’t preserve the extended income issue for appeal. However, his argument failed on the merits. The decision to apply the extended formula is discretionary and, unlike a deviation, doesn’t require findings. The father also argued that the court improperly set support in the final judgment. He argued the mother hadn’t shown the amount of temporary support as insufficient. The court found no authority to support this argument. The mother argued that the father shouldn’t have been given credit for the children’s direct expenses. The appellate court noted that the district court could have denied the request on procedural grounds but granting the credit was fair and appropriate.