Child Support; Sub-Guideline
Even though the District Court found that father’s current living expenses cover father, his fiancée, her child, and one subsequent child, we conclude that the District Court erred in setting father’s child support obligation at a sub-guideline amount where the District Court did not apply Minn. Stat. sec. 518.551, subd. 5f (2004) (regarding subsequent children) nor explain why the statute was not applied; the court did not explain why it included expenses attributable to the prior child of father’s fiancée, with whom father has no legal relationship; and the court did not address the criteria in Minn. Stat. sec. 518.551, subd. 5(c) (2004) and how the deviation serves the best interests of the child. Reversed and remanded.
