In re Marriage of Steele

Respondent appealed from a trial court order holding him in indirect civil contempt of court, calculating withdrawals from his IRA as income for support purposes, and finding the unallocated support cap contained in the marital settlement agreement unenforceable. The appellate court affirmed in part, vacated in part, and reversed in part explaining that the trial court must determine the principal/interest composition of the IRA withdrawals and the inclusion of interest in the support calculations, that the trial court did not err in holding respondent in civil contempt, and that the trial court improperly modified the language of the MSA when there was no request to modify the language of the agreement on file. The appellate court also affirmed the trial court’s decision that employer-paid contributions for respondent’s health insurance and life insurance costs did not constitute income. (SCHOSTOK and MULLEN, concurring)