If the combined annual income of both parents is greater than the maximum annual income listed on the basic child support schedule established pursuant to section 3119.021 of the Revised Code, the court, with respect to a court child support order, or the child support enforcement agency, with respect to an administrative child support order, shall determine the amount of the obligor's child support obligation on a case-by-case basis and shall consider the needs and the standard of living of the children who are the subject of the child support order and of the parents. The court or agency shall compute a basic combined child support obligation that is no less than the obligation that would have been computed under the basic child support schedule and applicable worksheet for a combined annual income equal to the maximum annual income listed on the basic child support schedule established pursuant to section 3119.021 of the Revised Code, unless the court or agency determines that it would be unjust or inappropriate and therefore not in the best interest of the child, obligor, or obligee to order that amount. If the court or agency makes such a determination, it shall enter in the journal the figure, determination, and findings. If the combined annual income of both parents falls below the $8,400 floor of the basic child support schedule in accordance with section 3119.021 of the Revised Code, the court, with respect to a court child support order, or the child support enforcement agency, with respect to an administrative child support order, shall apply the minimum support amount in accordance with section 3119.06 of the Revised Code.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 106
cases (24 in the last 5 years), 2006–2025 · leading case: Phelps v. Saffian, 2016 Ohio 5514 (Ohio Ct. App. 2016).
Phelps v. Saffian, 2016 Ohio 5514 (Ohio Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 15דInstead, R.C. 3119.04(B) states that if the combined income of the parties exceeds $150,000, the court must establish the amount of child support on a case-by-case basis, taking into consideration the “the needs and the standard of living of the children who are the subject of…”
Serra v. Serra, 2016 Ohio 950 (Ohio Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 13ד] The trial court erred and abused its discretion by extrapolating appellant's income [sic] for purposes of child support and by failing to conduct the case-by-case analysis required by R.C. 3119.04. [3.] The trial court erred and abused its discretion in awarding attorney fees.”
V.C. v. O.C., 2021 Ohio 1491 (Ohio Ct. App. 2021). · cites it 10דFather filed a motion to vacate the temporary child support order and requested an oral hearing, arguing that: (1) the order was issued before he had an opportunity to file a timely response to Mother’s motion, (2) the order was premature because the trial court had ordered the…”
In re J.M.G., 2013 Ohio 2693 (Ohio Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 17דargued that his monthly child support payment as set forth in the administrative order was excessive and that the CSEA’s calculation of the parties’ child support obligations violated R.C. 3119.04(B). R.B. also argued that his annual income had decreased, and was expected to…”
Schwieterman v. Schwieterman, 2020 Ohio 4881 (Ohio Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 12ד5 Thus, “[t]he level of support for a combined gross income of $150,000 [is] the starting point from which a trial court exercises its discretion in 5 In this case, the magistrate’s decision was filed on January 23, 2019.”
Guagenti v. Guagenti, 2017 Ohio 2706 (Ohio Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 8ד25635, 2012-Ohio-252 , 2012 WL 223925 , ¶ 5 ; R.C. 3119.04(B). If the parties have a combined income exceeding $150,000, the child support guidelines do not apply.”
Bajzer v. Bajzer, 2012 Ohio 252 (Ohio Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 7דBajzer to pay $6,000 per month in child support under R.C. 3119.04(B). In the course of its 2 considerations, the trial court imputed income to Ms.”
Rodgers v. Rodgers, 2017 Ohio 7886 (Ohio Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 6דAlthough trial courts may, in their discretion, apply the extrapolation method, nothing in R.C. 3119.04, which governs the calculation of child support, mandates its application.”
Woyt v. Woyt, 2019 Ohio 3758 (Ohio Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 9דPursuant to former R.C. 3119.04,3 where the parties’ combined gross income exceeds $150,000, the trial court must determine the child support amount on a case-by-case basis and in consideration of “the needs and the standard of living of the children who are subject of the child…”
J.E.M. v. D.N.M., 2021 Ohio 67 (Ohio Ct. App. 2021). · cites it 8ד05AP-684 and 06AP- 1224, 2007-Ohio-5079 , concerned the application of R.C. 3119.04 (“Determination of support obligation where combined gross income is less than $6,600 or greater than $150,000”), which went into effect in March 22, 2001, after the parties’ divorce action was…”
Kenney v. Carroll, 2021 Ohio 1911 (Ohio Ct. App. 2021). · cites it 14ד’s private-school education was previously funded through a scholarship and, when the scholarship ended, through a trust fund provided by his 1 We note that Section 3119.04 was amended effective March 28, 2019, and, unlike the prior version, no longer contains subsections (A)…”
Wolf-Sabatino v. Sabatino, 2014 Ohio 1252 (Ohio Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 6ד12AP-1042 3 SUPPORT ORDER ON THE WORKSHEET, INSTEAD OF A CASE-BY-CASE REVIEW OF THE PARTIES' LIFESTYLE AND THE CHILD'S NEEDS, PURSUANT TO R.C. 3119.04(B). III. THE COURT ERRED BY FAILING TO CONSIDER ADDITIONAL DEVIATION FACTORS, PURSUANT TO R.”
Woyt v. Woyt, 2019 Ohio 3758 (Ohio Ct. App. 2019). “Pursuant to former R.C. 3119.04,3 where the parties’ combined gross income exceeds $150,000, the trial court must determine the child support amount on a case-by-case basis and in consideration of “the needs and the standard of living of the children who are subject of the child…”
Phelps v. Saffian, 2016 Ohio 5514 (Ohio Ct. App. 2016). “Instead, R.C. 3119.04(B) states that if the combined income of the parties exceeds $150,000, the court must establish the amount of child support on a case-by-case basis, taking into consideration the “the needs and the standard of living of the children who are the subject of…”
In re J.M.G., 2013 Ohio 2693 (Ohio Ct. App. 2013). “argued that his monthly child support payment as set forth in the administrative order was excessive and that the CSEA’s calculation of the parties’ child support obligations violated R.C. 3119.04(B). R.B. also argued that his annual income had decreased, and was expected to…”
Guagenti v. Guagenti, 2017 Ohio 2706 (Ohio Ct. App. 2017). “25635, 2012-Ohio-252 , 2012 WL 223925 , ¶ 5 ; R.C. 3119.04(B). If the parties have a combined income exceeding $150,000, the child support guidelines do not apply.”
Bajzer v. Bajzer, 2012 Ohio 252 (Ohio Ct. App. 2012). “Bajzer to pay $6,000 per month in child support under R.C. 3119.04(B). In the course of its 2 considerations, the trial court imputed income to Ms.”
Schwieterman v. Schwieterman, 2020 Ohio 4881 (Ohio Ct. App. 2020). “5 Thus, “[t]he level of support for a combined gross income of $150,000 [is] the starting point from which a trial court exercises its discretion in 5 In this case, the magistrate’s decision was filed on January 23, 2019.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.