▶ Video explainer coming soon
The appeals court said yes. It upheld the $150 monthly payment. The court explained that judges have discretion when parents' combined income goes above the statutory cap. They can use the standard formula, other listed factors, or both. Here, the trial court considered several things. The parents shared equal physical custody. Their incomes were fairly similar. The child had medical coverage through Jennifer's insurance. The child also qualified for government benefits due to a medical condition. The marriage lasted just over four years. Jennifer had adopted the child. Based on all this, the appeals court found the lower payment was fair and reasonable.
Jennifer and Mohenda Surage got married in January 2014. Mohenda had a child from an earlier relationship, and Jennifer later adopted that child in December 2015. In April 2018, Jennifer filed for divorce. The parents reached an agreement on custody and parenting time in March 2019. After a trial without a jury, the court decided Jennifer would pay only $150 per month in child support. This was much lower than the standard amount under New York's Child Support Standards Act. Mohenda disagreed with this low amount and appealed the decision.
New York uses a formula called the Child Support Standards Act, or CSSA, to calculate child support. It applies a percentage to combined parental income, up to a set limit called the statutory cap. Here, that cap was $148,000. The question was whether the trial court was right to look past this formula. Could it order a lower payment because the parents shared custody equally and had similar incomes?
This case shows that child support isn't always a fixed formula. When parents earn similar incomes and share custody equally, courts can adjust payments downward. Judges look at the full picture, including insurance coverage, benefits, and family history. This gives courts flexibility to make support amounts fit each family's real situation.
Talk to a licensed family law lawyer in New York.