For summaries from opinions prior to August, 2018, view PDF versions here.
In re the Marriage of Widdison
Amy A. Widdison n/k/a Amy A. Dendy, Petitioner-Appellee
Harold K. Widdison, Respondent-Appellant
Attorney for Appellant
Harold K. Widdison, self-represented
Attorney for Appellee
Amanda Van Wyhe
Court of Appeals
Court of Appeals Opinion
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, Nancy L. Whittenburg, Judge. AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED. Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Doyle and Mullins, JJ. Carr, S.J., takes no part. Opinion by Doyle, J. (9 pages)
Harold Widdison appeals the order modifying the child-visitation and child-support provisions of the decree dissolving his marriage to Amy Widdison, now known as Amy Dendy. OPINION HOLDS: I. The slight decrease in Harold’s visitation during the school year is in the children’s best interests. II. We reverse the portion of the order increasing the amount of Harold’s child-support obligation because Amy did not request any increase. III. We do not consider Harold’s claim regarding the district court’s failure to disclose information, which he raised for the first time in his reply brief. IV. Because the district court acted within its discretion in awarding Amy trial attorney fees, we affirm. Considering the income disparity between the parties, we award Amy $3400 of her appellate attorney fees.