Cheung v. Meier (Child Custody) ( 2015 )

 A district court has limited discretion to deviate from the NRS
125B.070 child support formula, and any deviation must be based on the
factors in NRS 125B.080(9). Love v. Love, 114 Nev. 572, 579, 959 P.2d
523, 528 (1998). Each parent has a "duty to provide the child necessary
maintenance, health care, education and support," NRS 125B.020(1), and
it is presumed that the needs of the child are met by the NRS 125B.070
child support formula, NRS 125B.080(5). This court reviews district court
child support awards for an abuse of discretion. Wallace v. Wallace, 112
Nev. 1015, 1019, 922 P.2d 541, 543 (1996).
Having reviewed the parties' arguments and the appendix to
appellant's fast track statement, we are not persuaded that the district
court abused its discretion when it did not impose an upward deviation
from the child support formula and denied appellant's request that
respondent pay for a share of the extracurricular, activities requested by
appellant. Fernandez v. Fernandez, 126 Nev. 28, 40, 222 P.3d 1031, 1039
(2010) (explaining that "[t]he child's best interest, in the support setting, is
tied to the goal of the support statutes generally, which is to provide fair
support, as defined in [the statutory formula] and [NRS] 125B.080");
Wallace, 112 Nev. at 1019, 922 P.2d at 543. As to appellant's argument
that the district court failed to make findings regarding an upward
deviation analysis, because the district court did not grant the deviation, it
did not need to make specific findings of fact regarding the NRS
125B.080(9) factors. See NRS 125B.080(6) (providing that "[i]f the amount
of the awarded support. . . is greater or less than the amount which would
be established under the applicable formula" the court shall set forth
findings for the basis of the deviation); Anastassatos v. Anastassatos, 112
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
2
(0) 1947A cep
Nev. 317, 320, 913 P.2d 652, 654 (1996) (stating that the justification for
any non-conformity with the statutory formula must be specified in
written findings of fact).
Accordingly, we
ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.
Parraguirre
/ea J.
Douglas
cc: Hon. William S. Potter, District Judge, Family Court Division
Carolyn Worrell, Settlement Judge
Pecos Law Group
Steinberg Law Group
Eighth District Court Clerk
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
3
(0) 1947A e