The respondent brought a motion to reduce temporary child support and terminate spousal support following a claimed reduction in income after losing prior employment.
The applicant cross‑moved seeking increased child and spousal support and argued the respondent was intentionally under‑employed.
Applying the test under s. 19 of the Federal Child Support Guidelines and the principles in Drygala v. Pauli, the court found the respondent intentionally under‑employed due to insufficient efforts to obtain comparable employment and inadequate medical evidence supporting his reduced capacity.
Income was imputed to the respondent at $66,000 and the applicant’s income was set at $25,000 for support purposes.
Based on those incomes and the shared parenting arrangement, the court varied the temporary support amounts pending trial.
