Namati v. Lowhorn

I agree with the main opinion that the Marshall Circuit Court did not err by declining to award. Mohamad Namati (“the father”) a credit against his child-support arrearage for. a payment he made in April 2009, especially in light of his concession in footnote 1 of his appellate brief admitting that such a credit was, in fact, already awarded.

However, I respectfully dissent regarding the main opinion’s conclusion that the trial court erred by determining that the father was not entitled to a credit toward his child-support arrearage for the Social *1197Security benefits that the parties’ youngest…