In the case of Olivero v. Olivero, the court made a mistake by imputing potential overtime income to a father, impacting his child support calculation.
Imputation of income means assigning or attributing income to an individual even if they are not actually earning it.
The father, who was employed by the Michigan Department of Corrections, had previously worked overtime but had decided to stop doing so because it was causing him significant stress.
In this case, the court wrongly assumed that the father would continue working overtime and included this additional income in the calculation of child support.
Despite his choice to no longer work overtime, the Friend of the Court (FOC) recommended imputing overtime pay to the father when suggesting a modification to his child-support obligation and Washtenaw County Circuit Court adopted the recommendation.
The Michigan Court of Appeals reversed this decision siding with the father, stating that the Michigan Child Support Formula (MCSF) Manual explicitly prohibits the imputation of overtime income. The court noted that the trial court failed to adhere to the clear language of the MCSF Manual and did not provide the necessary findings to deviate from the guidelines outlined in the manual.
Key lessons from this case:
- Overtime payments can have both direct and indirect impacts on employee livelihood beyond simple payment of extra owed fees.
- Courts should take into account an individual’s specific circumstances and choices when determining overtime and child-support obligations.
- It is crucial for individuals involved in legal proceedings to assert their objections and provide necessary information to ensure a fair decision through appeals.
- The guidelines and rules set forth in relevant manuals or regulations require compliance with the plain language of the manual.
If you want to know more about overtime regulations, read our guide on Michigan Overtime Laws.
