## Facts

- A dissolution decree entered in 1995 awarded Mother physical custody of the parties’ two children; Father was the noncustodial parent and child-support obligor.
- An April 17, 2002 order set Father’s support at $364 per week plus 6% of any bonus income.
- Mother later obtained full-time employment; the trial court found her weekly income increased from $324 to $709.
- The trial court found Father’s weekly income (excluding bonuses) increased from $2,287 to $2,407.
- In October 2002, Father petitioned to modify support, asserting Mother’s increased earnings constituted a changed circumstance; he also sought parenting-time and expense-allocation relief.
- After a hearing, the trial court reduced Father’s support to $313 per week (plus 6% of bonus income), a reduction of about 14%.
- Mother appealed; the court of appeals affirmed, and the Indiana Supreme Court accepted transfer to review the support-modification ruling.

## Issues

1. Whether Mother’s increased income constituted a change in circumstances “so substantial and continuing as to make the terms [of the existing order] unreasonable” under Ind. Code § 31-16-8-1, justifying a reduction in Father’s child support.
2. Whether modification was permissible under Ind. Code § 31-16-8-1’s alternative “20% rule” permitting modification when application of the Guidelines would differ by more than 20% from the existing order (and the order is at least 12 months old).

## Decision

- The Indiana Supreme Court reversed the trial court’s reduction of Father’s child support.
- The Court held Mother’s income increase, considered against Father’s significantly higher earnings, did not make the existing support order unreasonable under the “substantial and continuing” standard.
- The Court determined the modification also could not be sustained under the 20% rule because the change in support was approximately 14%, not more than 20%.
- The effect was to set aside the reduced amount and leave in place the prior support obligation of $364 per week plus 6% of Father’s bonus income.

## Legal Principles

- Child support may be modified under Ind. Code § 31-16-8-1 only upon either (a) changed circumstances so substantial and continuing as to make the existing terms unreasonable, or (b) an alternative showing that applying the Guidelines would produce an amount differing by more than 20% from the existing order (if the order is at least 12 months old).
- The “substantial and continuing” standard requires more than minor or short-term income changes and serves to limit repetitive post-dissolution litigation.
- In evaluating whether an order has become unreasonable, courts may consider the parties’ relative economic positions rather than focusing solely on the percentage increase in one parent’s income.
- The 20% rule operates as a separate, bright-line basis for modification; failure to meet the 20% threshold strongly indicates the absence of statutory grounds to modify.

## Conclusion

The court held that a custodial parent’s move to full-time employment and resulting income increase, without more, did not satisfy Indiana’s statutory prerequisites for modifying child support where the noncustodial parent continued to earn substantially more and the Guidelines-based change was less than 20%.


MacLafferty v. MacLafferty, 829 N.E.2d 938 (Ind. 2005)