The parties brought cross-motions for temporary relief regarding child support, spousal support, and section 7 expenses.
The court found the respondent's declared income of approximately $30,000 lacked credibility given his past business operations, spending patterns, and a previous consent order imputing his income at $100,000.
The court imputed an income of $100,000 to the respondent and imputed an income of $20,000 (increasing to $28,000) to the applicant, who was operating a home-based hair salon.
The court ordered temporary child and spousal support based on these imputed incomes retroactive to August 2017, but dismissed the applicant's claims for section 7 expenses due to insufficient evidence.
