- 6 -
object, stating that Amanda lived with her mother for the years
1996 through 1999.
Upon the completion of Ms. Macera’s testimony, this Court
afforded petitioner the opportunity to cross-examine her about
her testimony. Petitioner, however, stated: “Your Honor, I have
no questions”, choosing not to question Ms. Macera about her
contradictory testimony. Petitioner’s failure to question Ms.
Macera’s testimony leads the Court to conclude that Amanda spent
little time residing at petitioner’s home and most of her time at
her mother’s house. Even if we relied solely on petitioner’s
testimony, we would nonetheless find that petitioner did not have
custody of Amanda for a portion of the year greater than that of
Ms. Macera.
Petitioner's situation falls squarely within the general
rule that the parent with custody of a child for the greater part
of the year is treated as having provided over half of that
child's support for the year. Petitioner’s testimony proves that
he had custody of Amanda for a period of time shorter than that
of Ms. Macera. Furthermore, Ms. Macera’s testimony that she had
custody of Amanda for the entire year remains uncontroverted.
Consequently, we find that petitioner did not have custody of
Amanda for the greater portion of the calendar year 1998.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011