Wife’s potential earning capacity is not an appropriate basis for determining maintenance in view of her testimony that she does not plan on teaching. A spouse is not disqualified from maintenance if he or she makes a career choice which results in reduced income.
No abuse of discretion in ordering 8 years of maintenance in 25 year marriage – no abuse of discretion in refusing to find that wife is intentionally underemployed and does not use her ability to become self-supporting.
Incarceration for intentional crime may be a substantial change in circumstances warranting modification of child support.
Only actual receipt of AFDC is excluded from gross income.
Where voluntary reduction of support was well intended, court can still consider the reasonableness of the employment choice in light of the support obligation.
(1) Child support order appropriate where mother stopped working so she can raise child from second marriage (2) Bad faith need not be shown to base an order on earning capacity (3) Second husband’s income can be considered as part of mother’s total economic circumstances.
Trial court did not fully consider statutory factors when it did not mention wife’s ability to become self-supporting in the future.
Voluntarily leaving job was unreasonable and court can impute earnings.
(1) Two tier orders does not apply as percentage standards are mandatory on modification (2) Decision by father to return to school was reasonable (3) Children benefit by more than just dollars – financial compensation is not exclusive factor.
Court can set child support based on potential income where father returned to school.