This article will analyze this decision on appeal, published recently (In Re Marriage of Cryer)which should serve as a clear example of why people should proceed with caution beforemaking such moves. In

"In Re Marriage of Cryer," we see the failed attempt of a famous actor, Jon Cryer, to modifychild support. Jon Cryer, known for his starring role in a popular comedy called "Two and a HalfMen," married his wife in 2000. During the same year, the parties gave birth to her minor child.But four years later, after Mr. Cryer completed his first season of "Two and a Half Men", theseparate parts and filed for divorce.

In 2004, Mr. Cryer entered into a stipulated judgment for dissolution under which bought Mrs.Cryer a condominium, and agreed to pay a sum of $ 10,000.00 per month in child support,based on their place of high income and 35 percent shared with the minor child party time.

In May 2009, the minor child was injured while at home of Mrs. Cryer. The Department ofChildren and Families, subsequently filed a dependency, and removed the child from the care ofMrs Cryer and placed the child with Mr. Cryer. As a result, Mr. Cryer filed an order to showcause for downward modification of child support based on their greater share of time and Ms.Cryer of the decline in time spent with the minor child. This motion was filed in August 2009,

1 / 2

when Mr. Cryer admitted he won $ 327,000.00 per month and had liquid assets of $ 7 million.

Pellman Judge of the Superior Court of Los Angeles, the judge presiding over the matter,rejected the request of Mr. Cryer in part and granted in part. Upon hearing the arguments of Mr.Cryer, he ordered his child support obligation reduced to $ 8,000.00 per month, from the original$ 10,000.00 per month, to reflect its increased time with the child. However, the judge refusedPellman to reduce their child support obligation to the guideline amount of zero, because shethought the child support order based on the guideline formula would be "unfair andinappropriate".

Pellman judge also determined that Mr. Cryer was a source of income and extraordinarily highincome was found to be in the best interest of the child to return home to her mother in the wayhe was used to living in the home of Mr. Cryer. The evidence showed that Ms. Cryereconomically dependent on Mr Cryer, and she would not be able to keep the house if supportwas drastically reduced. Based on its extensive prior experience as a judge in the JuvenileCourt Judge Pellman is very familiar with the process that occurs after the Department ofChildren and Family Services presented a petition in Juvenile Court. Pellman judge said thedependency action was in its early stages and that the Juvenile Court custody may change atany time and return the child to Ms Cryer as primary caregiver. Therefore, it would not be in thebest interest of the child to accede to the request of Mr. Cryer guideline support. Mr. Cryer

Think the judge erred in Pellman rule on his request for modification of child support andappealed the decision. On appeal, however, they were affirmed Judge Pellman resolutions. TheCourt of Appeal held that the judge did not err Pellman to reduce the child support to $ 8,000.00per month, due to the possibility of a rapid change in custody and visits, special circumstancesrelated to the large disparity in income of the parties and the trial court findings that was in thebest interest of the child not to be ordered child support guidelines under.

Unfortunately for Mr. Cryer, Pellman judge also ordered him to pay all attorney fees related toMs. Multiple hearings on this matter, which totaled over $ 40,000.00 Cryer. Therefore, Mr. Cryernot only lost in its attempt to reduce the child support guideline amount, but he also got stuckpaying the bill for their failed efforts.

In light of this decision, I think we can conclude that the modification of child support is not aseasy as it sounds. If you do not believe me, ask Jon Cryer.

About The Author

Donald P. SchweitzerLaw Offices of Donald P. Schweitzer201 South Lake Avenue, Suite 800Pasadena, California 91101http://www.PasadenaDivorce.com

How Child Custody determined

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

2 / 2