In some divorces and post-judgment cases, one parent does not disclose his or her true income, employment, or both. If the ruse is discovered timely, the fraud may be remedied.
In Marriage of Rocha, the appellate court ruled rather harshly against a former husband. The parties divorced in 1998, and were in post-judgment child support proceedings from 2001 through 2003. In May 2003 the court held a status conference about the ex-husband’s employment. He did not inform the court or the ex-wife that he had just started a new job at a hospital. He later explained that he was on a 90-day probationary period, and “he wasn’t asked” about any new job. Child support remained at $150 weekly.
The trial court also ordered the ex-husband to give the ex-wife copies of his income tax returns within 14 days after filing them. He did not annually disclose them to her.
Child support stayed at $150 weekly from 1998 until the ex-wife filed a motion to modify support in 2010. In November 2011 the ex-wife filed a motion to vacate the 2003 orders, alleging the husband fraudulently concealed his new employment and income.
The ex-husband’s actions and inactions were called “deliberate … ongoing, long-term, fraud.” He was ordered to pay past-due child support of over $32,400 that he should have paid from 2003 to 2010. The ex-husband was also ordered to pay more than $17,600 in statutory interest that accrued on the child support that he should have paid all along during that period.
The Law Office of Christopher Haaff unfortunately encounters some parents like these. It is good to see the ex-husband’s fraud had severe consequences. Rocha should have a chilling effect on others doing things like this, or considering them.