CA Income determination support

In an unpublished opinion the Appeals Court upheld an order determining that the lower court's Smith/Ossler type order on the income of a self-employed consultant where the consultant topped out his income and got ownership interest in a company could not be determined to be the multiplier of the consultant's hourly rate times 40 hours a week.

The experts testimony on the above was not sufficient to show he could earn the hourly rate 40 hours a week.

Earning Capacity is income the party is reasonably capable of earning based on the spouses age, health, education, marketable skils, employment history and available employment opportunities.

Here The expert admitted that there was nothing to show that 40 hours was reasonable in light of the 10K cap from the consultee and only 10 to 18 percent of the income coming from hourly.

There has to be a showing of ability to work, and an employer willing to hire, none of which was shown in the evidence.

Bottom Line: The fact that you can multiply 40 times an hourly rate will not be sufficient to show income unless you can show someone who is willing to hire for 40 times the hourly rate.

In re the Marriage of SUZANNE S. and KARL B. HIGGINS. SUZANNE S. WINN,Appellant, v. KARL B. HIGGINS, Respondent. D054223