Recent developments in Oklahoma family law from 2008 are summarized. Child support laws were updated to allow for problem-solving courts and expanded skills training options. Case law established that a father's income for calculating child support must be based on recent primary employment stubs, not fluctuating secondary incomes. Child custody and relocation cases clarified the factors courts consider in determining the child's best interests. Property division cases addressed dividing retirement accounts and military pensions. Dissolution procedure cases dealt with issues like remarriage timelines and vacating orders not properly served.

1. Recent Developments In Oklahoma Family Law - 2008 December 7, 2008 Materials – Julie S. Rivers Slides - David A. Tracy Family Law Solutions P.C. Naylor, Williams & Tracy, Inc 6440 Avondale Dr., Ste. 208 1701 S. Boston Ave. Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73118 Tulsa, OK 74119 405-843-5581 918-582-8000 [email_address] [email_address]

2. CHILD SUPPORT

3. SB 2194 – portions effective 11-1-08 21 O.S. §566.1 – contempt of court Alternative sentencing Problem solving court 43 O.S. §140 – problem solving court structure 56 O.S. §240.10 – skills training option expanded 30 O.S. §2-108 – child support in guardianships – DHS necessary party?

4. Hogue v. Hogue 2008 OK CIV APP 63, 190 P.3d 1177 Issue – What is father’s income for purposes of calculating child support Loan officer, income fluctuates Football referee, oil royalties, second job Court bases income on last 3 stubs from primary employment. Modification made retroactive to month motion to modify custody was filed. Held – error on both counts

5. CHILD CUSTODY VISITATION (parenting time)

6. Harrison v. Morgan 2008 OK CIV APP 68, 191 P.3d 617 Custodian seeks to move from Guymon to Poteau. Trial court - Custody not modified, but request to relocate denied. Appellate court reviewed factors set forth in 43 O.S. §112.3. Held – mother did not prove that relocation is not in child’s best interest.

7. Stonebarger v. Wilkins 2008 OK CIV APP 35, 182 P.3d 849 Relocation to Texas Court enters TRO After trial, court allows relocation Mother carried burden of proof to show relocation is in good faith Father fails to carry burden that relocation is not in child’s best interest Affirmed

8. Hogue v. Hogue 2008 OK CIV APP 63, 190 P.3d 1177 Child expresses preference – age 15 – no other change in circumstances Court heard child in chambers – counsel and parties excluded Custody modified Affirmed

9. White v. White, 2007 OK 86, 173 P.3d 78 2003 Decree – joint custody 2005 Mom relocates to California 2007 Mom files motion to modify custody Motion granted per Rule 4e after opening statements Held – abuse of discretion - Gibbbons standard trumps judicial economy

10. Kelly v. Kelly 2007 OK 100, 175 P.3d 400 Guardian ad litem appointed Trial court denies father’s request to call GAL as witness. Held – due process requires that GAL may be called as witness, and cross examined.

11. PROPERTY DIVISON

12. Brazil v. Brazil 2007 OK CIV APP 108, 171 P.3d 325 Major assets – home and municipal employee retirement account Husband, 54, eligible to retire, but still working Wife’s expert Pension present value if H retires now - $453,665 Pension value if H retires at 65 - $266,638 Trial court awards wife alimony & 45.59% of pension value by QDRO. Reversed – trial court directed to use present value method of distribution

13. Hodge v. Hodge Military pension case. Court awards wife ½ of husband’s military pension. No order entered. Service member retires, part of his pension is converted to disability Trial court enters order that wife gets ½ of pension accrued “during marriage” Held – that’s not what the original decree says - reversed.

14. Watkins v. Watkins 2007 OK CIV APP 122, 177 P.3d 1114 2000 decree 2004 contempt – failure to pay property division Husband claims offsets by agreement of the parties Trial court finds no offset Held – husband only entitled to credit for wife’s share of child medical; court need not fine or imprison every contempt defendant

15. PARENTAGE

16. In The Matter of M.J.T 2008 OK CIV APP 56, 189 P.3d 745 Name change issue – trial court changed surname to father’s Held – no evidence that name change serves child’s best interests Fulfilling parental responsibilities does not entitle parent to have child carry surname.

17. DISSOLUTION PROCEDURE

18. Brooks v. Sanders, 2008 OK CIV APP 66, 190 P.3d 357 1991 marriage (Debbie) 2000 CL relationship (Brooks) 02/14/2006 dissolution (Debbie) 05/13/2006 work related death Issue – who is entitled to worker’s comp death benefit? Held – remarriage within Oklahoma within 6 months is voidable under the circumstances

19. O’Darling v. O’Darling 2008 OK 71, 188 P.3d 137 Canadian marriage – 2002 Oklahoma divorce filed 2006 Issue – Held – proper to vacate decree per 1031.1; remand for further consideration of relief available, if any, under petition.

20. Marriage of Allen, 2008 OK CIV APP 75, 193 P.3d 975 2001 Decree 2003 “agreed” modification 2007 motion to modify Response, motion to vacate 2003 order Issue – is 2003 order void for lack of motion and service. Trial court denies motion to vacate Held – 2003 order is void.

21. DeLeon v. Avery 2007 OK CIV APP 91, 170 P.3d 1043 Dissolution case pending, ATI in place Temporary order entered Husband changes life insurance beneficiary Husband dies Wife files declaratory judgment action Trial court – pay successor beneficiary Affirmed

22. Recent Developments In Oklahoma Family Law - 2008 December 7, 2008 Materials – Julie S. Rivers Slides - David A. Tracy Family Law Solutions P.C. Naylor, Williams & Tracy, Inc 6440 Avondale Dr., Ste. 208 1701 S. Boston Ave. Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73118 Tulsa, OK 74119 405-843-5581 918-582-8000 [email_address] [email_address]