In re Marriage of Izzo

Respondent petitioned the Court to reduce his child-support obligations. The trial court found that there had not been a substantial change in circumstances even though Respondent's overnight custody had grown from 15% to 45%. The court explained that Respondent’s increased share of custody was too remote, having occurred five years after the original judgment but four years before the petition to modify. The Appellate Court reversed, finding that the trial court made an error of law when it found the change too remote. Respondent’s circumstances at the time of the petition should have been measured against his circumstances at the time of the most recent support judgment, not against the circumstances at some time between the two events. The Court determined that the change in custody was sufficient on its own to establish a substantial change in circumstances justifying a reduction of child-support amount. (ZENOFF and BURKE concurring.)