2024-CA-0513-MR
Knox Family Court
Kentucky Court of Appeals
Opinion by Judge Caldwell
Date Rendered: August 8, 2025
Question Presented: (1) Whether Husband was entitled to credit for post-separation mortgage payments before dividing the marital home’s equity; and (2) Whether the family court erred in awarding child support retroactive to the date Husband filed his own motion, even though Wife had not filed her own request.
Husband and Wife married in 2013, separated in 2020 or 2021, and had three children. A temporary order in May 2021 gave Husband exclusive possession of the marital home, ordered him to pay the mortgage, and set custody and parenting time. No child support was ordered at that time. Husband later filed a child support motion in September 2021, which Wife opposed but in her response she noted that she might be entitled to support retroactive to that date. The family court did not rule until the divorce decree in April 2024, which ordered Husband to pay $681.85 monthly in child support, retroactive to September 2021, creating an arrearage exceeding $21,000. The decree also ordered the marital residence sold to Husband’s father, with net proceeds divided equally. Husband requested credit for $27,764.80 in post-separation mortgage payments, but the trial court denied it, reasoning that Wife had incurred higher rental expenses while Husband occupied the marital home exclusively.
Husband appealed, challenging the denial of a credit for post-separation mortgage payments and the retroactive award of child support.
The Court of Appeals affirmed the denial of the mortgage credit but reversed the award of retroactive child support.
On the property issue, the Court explained that the home remained marital property until the divorce decree, and post-separation mortgage payments therefore benefited both parties. Since Husband had exclusive use of the home while Wife paid higher rent, the trial court acted within its discretion in dividing the equity without granting him an offset.
On the child support issue, the Court reasoned that Kentucky precedent allows retroactive child support to the date the recipient party files a motion for support. Here, Wife never filed her own motion or unequivocally demanded support until trial. Allowing retroactive support under these circumstances unfairly saddled Husband with nearly three years of arrears without adequate notice. This was palpable error resulting in manifest injustice. The ongoing obligation of $681.85 from the date of the decree remained intact, but the retroactive award was reversed.
Digested by Nathan R. Hardymon