Dubose v. Dubose

I write to. express my agreement with Presiding Judge Thompson’s analysis regarding the significant, “hidden assets” of Stuart.C. Dubose (“the husband”). I believe that, in determining child-support obligations, trial courts should be able, to *1154consider financial resources that are not currently producing income if those assets could be income-producing ventures. Like Presiding Judge Thompson, I find persuasive the reasoning of Barton v. Hirshberg, 137 Md. App. 1, 20, 767 A.2d 874, 884 (2001), and Stekr v. Beecham, 291 Neb. 883, 888-89, 869 N.W.2d 347, 351-52 (2015). Accordingly, I disagree…