J.E.S. v. A.S.

Citations

• 2026 Ohio 458

Syllabus

Support; spousal; child; impute income; minimum wage; voluntarily underemployed; abuse of discretion; R.C. 3105.18 factors; R.C. 3119.01 factors; pending appeal with the Ohio Supreme Court; mandate; subject-matter jurisdiction; S.Ct.Prac.R. 18.04(D). Judgment affirmed. The trial court had jurisdiction to proceed with the case following the Ohio Supreme Court's decision to decline Husband's jurisdictional appeal on May 27, 2025, and issue an amended judgment entry, two days later on May 29, 2025. S.Ct.Prac.R. 18.04(D) does not require a mandate as Husband contends. Therefore, May 27, 2025, the day the decision was issued, guides us. Additionally, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in imputing minimum wage income to Wife, declining to award spousal support, and ordering Husband to pay child support. Husband reargues the same facts and issues we considered in the previous appeal, referencing the gifts Wife received from B.T. (her father), her monthly expenses, and the money in B.T.'s trust account that Wife receives as a beneficiary. However, we found that the trial court's consideration of these gift was improper. As a result, the trial court and this court cannot consider B.T.'s gifts to Wife when determining Wife's income. When reviewing the other evidence in the record, it is clear that Wife did not have any source of income in her own name. The court found the testimony established that Wife is voluntarily underemployed based upon her education, work history, and potential employment. Notably, other than referring to the gifts Wife received from B.T., which we previously found was improper for the trial court to consider, Husband can point to no evidence of Wife's income. Therefore, the trial court's conclusion that Wife was voluntarily underemployed and imputing an annual minimum wage income of $22,256 was not an abuse of discretion.