Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

H and Carolyn (W) were married on October 3, 1998, and divorced on May 3, 1999. They had one child together. H worked as a custodian, and he was ordered to pay a percentage of his gross income for child support. Child support was determined on 2001 income. On April 21, 2005, a modification hearing was held before a family court commissioner, and a new support obligation was ordered based on H's 2004 income. The court commissioner's order shows that he excluded the overtime income as a general policy when calculating gross income and a subsequent child support obligation. The circuit court followed the court commissioner's decision. The court held that if H is working diligently and earning a lot of overtime pay to pay his current obligations and . . . if he has other children . . . I think he ought to be entitled to do that. I think his basis of paying on his . . . regular pay and his longevity pay is fair, but I really disagree with going after overtime. P appealed.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.