- Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
- Area(s) of Law: Family Law
- Date Filed: 09-16-2020
- Case #: A164070
- Judge(s)/Court Below: Powers, P.J. for the Court; Egan, C.J.; & Landau, S.J.
- Full Text Opinion
Husband appeals the denial of a motion for spousal support modification. On appeal, Husband argued that, because he had not finished demonstrating his evidence, including his personal testimony when the trial court arrived at their decision, that granting Wife’s motion to dismiss the spousal support modification claim was an error. “A spousal support award may be modified when there has been a substantial and unanticipated change in the parties’ economic circumstances since the time of the earlier award” and whether it is "just and equitable, under the totality of circumstances.” Harp and Harp, 214 Or App 520, 523-24, 167 P3d 457 (2007). In weighing a party’s capacity to meet the demands of a support award, the court may consider what a party is currently being given, earning capacities, and prospective future earnings. Id.; see also ORS 107.135(4)(a). The Court found that the trial court acted unseasonably when it granted Wife’s motion before Husband had finished presenting his case. The trial court’s granting of Wife’s motion was prejudicial to Husband because had the evidence been allowed to develop, a different outcome may have occurred. Supplemental Judgement vacated and remanded.