In re the Marriage of Christiansen

Husband appeals from a judgment in a child support enforcement action in which the trial court concluded that modifications to husband’s support obligation had not extinguished his obligation to pay support under ORS 107.108 for children attending school.1 Wife cross-appeals, claiming that the trial court erred when it determined that husband was not required to pay child support for the two months of each year in which the children were to stay with him, even though the children had not actually done that. We affirm on appeal and reverse on cross-appeal.

The facts are not disputed. Husband…