## Facts

- A divorce decree awarded the mother custody of the parties’ minor child and required the father to pay $6,400 per year in child support.
- After the divorce, both parents remarried.
- The father had two additional children and assumed custody of a child from a prior marriage.
- The father’s gross annual income increased by $7,738 after the divorce.
- The father petitioned for a downward modification of his child-support obligation, asserting changed financial circumstances, including additional support responsibilities.

## Issues

1. Whether an increase in the obligor parent’s income is an absolute bar to seeking a child-support modification.
2. Whether an obligor parent’s increased responsibility to support other children may be considered in determining whether there has been a change in financial status warranting modification.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of Georgia reversed the trial court’s dismissal and remanded.
- The court held that an increase in the obligor’s income is not an absolute bar to pursuing modification.
- The court held that increased support responsibilities for other children may be considered as part of the obligor’s change in financial status, though they do not automatically justify a reduction.

## Legal Principles

- Under O.C.G.A. § 19-6-19, child support may be revised when the petitioning party shows a change in the income and financial status of either former spouse or a change in the needs of the child.
- The right to seek modification is not limited to cases in which the obligor’s income has decreased.
- A court may consider an obligor’s additional support obligations for other children as a factor bearing on financial status; categorical exclusion of such obligations is error.
- Prior decisions allowing increased support despite increased expenses do not establish a rule that increased income forecloses an obligor’s petition for downward modification.

## Conclusion

The Georgia Supreme Court rejected categorical rules that (1) treat an obligor’s post-decree income increase as a complete bar to modification and (2) exclude later-acquired child-support responsibilities from consideration, and it remanded for a determination of whether the totality of circumstances showed a sufficient change in financial status under O.C.G.A. § 19-6-19.


Miller v. Tashie, 265 Ga. 147, 454 S.E.2d 498 (Ga. 1995)