Stanaway v. Stanaway

This case involves a divorce action.

The judgment of divorce obligates plaintiff to pay "child support for [the parties’] minor child in an amount equal to six (6%) per cent of his adjusted gross income, as defined for federal income tax purposes, but not less than the sum of $165 monthly, * * * Plaintiff contends that such an unlimited "escalator” clause with its provision for a possible annual lump sum payment beyond the enumerated child support amount constitutes an error of law. We agree.

Escalator clauses in child support judgments have been very rare. The only Michigan decision construing…