Davison and Schafer

Under the best-interests analysis of ORS 107.137(1), a court may consider lifestyle choices, such as moves, only if the choices “will or may cause damage to the child.” Miller and Miller, 269 Or App 436, 443, 345 P3d 472 (2015) (emphasis in original). Increased difficulty to the noncustodial parent’s ability to co-parent is “not relevant to the determination of damage.” Id. at 444. If a parent is a full-time student, imputation of full-time income is not appropriate. Bouris and Bouris, 276 Or App 637, 639, 369 P3d 1186 (2016).

Mother appealed the order granting Father custody of their daughter for the majority of non-school days and decreasing the amount of child support that Father pays.  On appeal, Mother assigned error to the trial court’s decisions and argued that the trial court had abused its discretion.  Under the best-interests analysis of ORS 107.137(1), a court may consider lifestyle choices, such as moves, only if the choices “will or may cause damage to the child.”  Miller and Miller, 269 Or App 436, 443, 345 P3d 472 (2015) (emphasis in original).  Increased difficulty to the noncustodial parent’s ability to co-parent is “not relevant to the determination of damage.”  Id. at 444.  If a parent is a full-time student, imputation of full-time income is not appropriate.  Bouris and Bouris, 276 Or App 637, 639, 369 P3d 1186 (2016).  The Court found that Daughter was happy living with Mother and the record supplied “no justification for concluding” it was in Daughter’s best interest to increase Father’s custody at Mother’s expense.  Further, the trial court erred in determining Mother’s potential income without considering her student status.  Thus, the Court held that “the trial court abused its discretion” when it made the order.  Reversed and remanded.