District II
January 28, 2015
To:
Hon. Ralph M. Ramirez
Circuit Court Judge
Waukesha County Courthouse
515 W. Moreland Blvd.
Waukesha, WI 53188
Kathleen A. Madden
Clerk of Circuit Court
Waukesha County Courthouse
515 W. Moreland Blvd.
Waukesha, WI 53188
Marylee Dolack Richmond
Child Support Division
515 W. Moreland Blvd., Rm. 348
Waukesha, WI 53188
Michael J. Finn
Finn Law Office
163 E. Capitol Dr.
Hartland, WI 53029
Dean K. Sossaman
437 W. College Ave.
Waukesha, WI 53186
You are hereby notified that the Court has entered the following opinion and order:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In re the Paternity of N.G.M.: State of Wisconsin v. Diana P. Minster (L.C. # 1997PA381PJ) |
|
|
|
|
|
Before Neubauer, P.J., Reilly and Gundrum, JJ.
Dean K. Sossaman appeals a
circuit court order concerning a tax intercept of his federal tax return for
child support arrears. Based on our review of the
briefs and record, we conclude at conference that this case is appropriate for
summary disposition. See Wis.
Stat. Rule 809.21 (2011-12).[1] We affirm the order of the circuit court.
Sossaman and Diana Minster have one child
together. The child lived primarily with
Minster except for a brief period in 2012 when the child resided with Sossaman.
On March 29, 2013, the circuit court expunged any child
support arrears owed by Sossaman to account for the time that the child resided
with him. It also required Sossaman to
pay future child support in the amount of $281 per month commencing April 1,
2013. The court entered a formal order on
April 16, 2013.
On April 12, 2013, the State received a tax intercept of
Sossaman’s federal tax return in the amount of $650. The amount was disbursed to Minster and to be
applied to any outstanding child support arrears that Sossaman had. After the Waukesha County Child Support
Agency received a copy of the April 16, 2013 circuit court order expunging any arrears,
it credited the $650 to Sossaman’s account for child support obligations going
forward. It then informed both Minster
and Sossaman of its action.
When Sossaman subsequently demanded the return of the $650, the State filed a motion for the circuit court to make a determination on how to proceed. Although the court did not agree with the action of prospectively applying the $650 to child support obligations, it allowed Sossaman to receive that credit. It then further compensated Sossaman by expunging new child support arrears and reducing guardian ad litem fees owed by a total of $650. The court recognized that “in essence [Sossaman] is getting like double credit here. I understand that, but I think that’s an appropriate, equitable remedy under the circumstances of this case.” Sossaman now appeals.
This court reviews an order
regarding child support under an erroneous exercise of discretion
standard. See Ladwig v. Ladwig, 2010 WI App 78, ¶15, 325 Wis. 2d 497,
785 N.W.2d 664. A court properly
exercises its discretion when it examines the relevant facts, applies a proper
standard of law, and, using a demonstrated rational process, reaches a
conclusion that a reasonable judge could reach.
Id.
Here, we are satisfied that the circuit court properly exercised its discretion in fashioning a remedy following the State’s tax intercept of Sossaman’s federal tax return for child support arrears that had already been expunged. Although Sossaman complains that the court should have ordered the $650 returned to him, he suffered no damages from the court’s decision. Indeed, he ultimately benefited from receiving $1,300 of credit on debts owed by him.
Upon the foregoing reasons,
IT
IS ORDERED that the order of the circuit court is summarily affirmed, pursuant
to Wis. Stat. Rule 809.21.
Diane M. Fremgen
Clerk of Court of Appeals