In Re the Marriage of Shorten

¶27 I dissent from the Court’s opinion as to Issue 1, and I would reverse. Accordingly, I would not address Issue 2.

¶28 At the outset, I note that § 40-4-208(1), MCA, allows only for the prospective modification of child support payments. In re Marriage of Hooper (1991), 247 Mont. 322, 324, 806 P.2d 541, 543. We have also held that each child support payment “becomes a judgment debt similar to any other judgment for money.” Willoughby v. Loomis (1994), 264 Mont. 44, 49, 869 P.2d 271, 274 (quoting In re Marriage of Sabo (1986), 224 Mont. 252, 254, 730 P.2d 1112, 1113).

¶29 Notwithstanding our…