In re the Marriage of Shoemaker

(dissenting) — I dissent. The real issue in this case is whether the trial court had authority to vacate a five-year-old modification order, based upon concededly changed circumstances. The majority determines that the trial court has no such authority under CR 60(b), or RCW 26.09.170, or equitable principles. I disagree and would hold that the trial court plainly had the authority to vacate a modifiable order for child support under equitable principles.2

As the majority concedes, courts in Washington have inherent equitable power to modify dissolution decrees, if the circumstances of the…