Consuela M. Brown
v.
Steven L. Roquet
Appellant
Consuela M. Brown
Appellee
Steven L. Roquet
Attorney for the Appellant
Danni J. Harris and Kimberly S. Bartosh (until withdrawal)
Attorney for the Appellee
Heather M. Simplot and Patrick F. Curran
Court of Appeals
Court of Appeals Opinion
Opinion Number:
Date Published:
Summary
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Wapello County, Lucy J. Gamon, Judge. AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED AND REMANDED. Heard by Tabor, P.J., and Greer and Ahlers, JJ. Opinion by Greer, J. Partial Dissent by Ahlers, J. (15 pages)
Consuela Brown appeals the district court order imposing a child support obligation on Steven Roquet. Consuela argues the court should not have reduced his past child support obligation based on a personal injury settlement the child received, the court should have assessed a higher interest rate on the past payments, and the court should award her appellate attorney fees. OPINION HOLDS: We agree that the district court should not have reduced the back child support award by half of the amount of the settlement. We conclude the court should have imposed a ten percent interest rate, but this rate applies only if Steven is over thirty days behind on a child support payment. Steven shall be responsible for Consuela’s’ appellate attorney fees. We remand for entry of an order consistent with our opinion. PARTIAL CONCURRENCE, PARTIAL DISSENT ASSERTS: Upon review of the circumstances of this case, without being bound to the model used by the district court, I find no error in the amount of back child support awarded by the district court. Because I would affirm on that issue, I also dissent with regard to awarding the mother appellate attorney fees. I concur in the decision reached on the issue of the interest rate to be used on the back child support award.
