SCOTT LEE EARLES, Petitioner-Appellee, vs. TAMMY L. ONLEY, Respondent-Appellant.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA
No. 9-604 / 09-0116
Filed October 21, 2009
SCOTT LEE EARLES,
Petitioner-Appellee,
vs.
TAMMY L. ONLEY,
Respondent-Appellant.
________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Michael D. Huppert,
Judge.
A mother asserts the district court failed to grant her application to modify
visitation of her son. AFFIRMED.
James Cook, West Des Moines, for appellant.
Timothy Duffy, Des Moines, for appellee.
Considered by Vogel, P.J., and Potterfield, J., and Huitink, S.J.*
*Senior judge assigned by order pursuant to Iowa Code section 602.9206 (2009).
2
VOGEL, P.J.
In this appeal, Tammy Onley asserts the district court failed to grant her
application to modify the visitation previously granted to Scott, with their son, Z.
She also asserts the district court should not have reduced the child support, as
Scott failed to provide accurate information of his current income. On our de
novo review, we affirm. Iowa R. App. P. 6.907 (2009). We are not bound by the
trial court’s findings of facts, but we give them deference because the trial court
had a firsthand opportunity to view the demeanor of the parties and evaluate
them as custodians. In re Marriage of Walton, 577 N.W.2d 869, 871 (Iowa Ct.
App. 1998).
I. Background Facts and Proceedings
Tammy and Scott were never married, but a son, Z., was born to them in
1997.
Initially, they agreed to joint legal custody of Z., with Tammy having
physical care and Scott having reasonable, but set, visitation. Child support was
set at $550 per month, an amount in excess of what would have been required at
that time, but appropriate under the circumstances.
II. Visitation
In May 2008, Tammy sought to modify the original decree, seeking sole
custody of Z., and restricting Scott’s visitation.
Scott responded by seeking
physical care of Z., or in the alternative, additional visitation and a modification of
child support.1
The district court heard extensive testimony from both parties and
received evidence from several professionals who had worked with the parties in
1
This issue was withdrawn prior to the hearing.
3
various therapy settings. None of the professionals involved with the parties
could support the allegations Tammy and Scott hurled at each other during trial.
For years the parties have put their son in the middle of their intolerance for each
other. At the close of the evidence, the district court made detailed findings
analyzing the strengths and weaknesses of the parties in their ongoing and
hostile relationship with each other. The district court, after having seen and
heard the parties each testify, made appropriate credibility findings. We defer to
those findings. Tim O’Neill Chevrolet, Inc. v. Forristall, 551 N.W.2d 611, 614
(Iowa 1996) (stating that the district court is in a better position to evaluate the
credibility of witnesses; thus, factual disputes depending heavily on such
credibility are best resolved by the district court). The animosity between the
parties revealed to the district court remains apparent in the tenor of this appeal.
On our de novo review, we affirm the district court’s finding of facts, application of
the law, and its conclusions. Iowa Court Rule 21.29(1)(a), (d), and (e).
III. Child Support
Tammy claims the district court should not have reduced Scott’s child
support obligation from $550 per month to $376.78. In reducing the amount, the
court noted Scott’s dubious estimate of his own earnings as a self-employed
painter. Nonetheless, the court reviewed Scott’s late-filed 2005 and 2006 federal
and Iowa income tax returns, and imputed income to Scott upon which the child
support was then calculated. See In re Marriage of Will, 602 N.W.2d 202, 204
(Iowa Ct. App. 1999) (“Generally, completed federal and/or state income tax
returns are the best evidence of income and tax liability.”). We, like the district
court, also find Scott’s reported income and claimed deductions suspicious, but
4
conclude the court properly determined the most accurate imputation of income
from the evidence presented.
As such, we affirm the modification of child
support. Costs on appeal assessed to Tammy.
AFFIRMED.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
