Legal Opinion · Concurrence

In re L.K.Y.

Colorado Court of Appeals

Decided July 3, 2013No. Court of Appeals No. 12CA1674Published

1Concurrence

JUDGE ROTHENBERG, specially concurring.

¶ 17 I concur with the majority that the temporary child support order must be affirmed because Young's housing and food allowances are part of her income under the statute. However, I write separately because I agree with Peabody that the statute creates an inequitable result in this case. Young is being reimbursed by the military for her primary living expenses, and she is also receiving an increase in child support payments from Peabody because Young's military reimbursement payments are included in calculating the parties' combined gross income.

¶ 18…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. In re the Marriage of HaddadColorado Court of Appeals · 2004
  2. In Re the Marriage of HeinColorado Court of Appeals · 2010

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API