Dear Jag,

Just to get these facts clear: The Father requests (via motion) child support be paid him after he quits his job. Mother opposes, on the grounds that he is voluntarily unemployer/underemployed. Judge denies father' s motion for child support and makes what appears to be a "sua sponte" order of child support from father to mother, despite the fact that the mother did not expressly make a Cross Motion for same. Is this correct?

And you are wondering about precedential case law but this is much further than caselaw because Virginia has actually set into statutue, expressly, the Court's right to make "its own motion...revise and alter such decree concerning the ...maintenance of the children....make a new decree concerning the same, as the circumstances of the parents and the benefit of the children may require." Both statute AND caselaw allow the Judge to do this, expressly:

? 20-108. Revision and alteration of such decrees.

The court may, from time to time after decreeing as provided in ? 20-107.2, on petition of either of the parents, or on its own motion or upon petition of any probation officer or the Department of Social Services, which petition shall set forth the reasons for the relief sought, revise and alter such decree concerning the care, custody, and maintenance of the children and make a new decree concerning the same, as the circumstances of the parents and the benefit of the children may require. The intentional withholding of visitation of a child from the other parent without just cause may constitute a material change of circumstances justifying a change of custody in the discretion of the court.

No support order may be retroactively modified, but may be modified with respect to any period during which there is a pending petition for modification in any court, but only from the date that notice of such petition has been given to the responding party.

Any member of the United States Armed Forces Reserves, Virginia National Guard, or Virginia National Guard Reserves, who files a petition or is a party to a petition requesting the adjudication of the custody, visitation or support of a child based on a change of circumstances because one of the parents has been called to active duty, shall be entitled to have such a petition expedited on the docket of the court.

Nonetheless, there IS a case precedent for you: Barret v. Commonwealth of Va. et al

http://courts.state.va.us/opinions/opncavtx/1332073.txt

II. Alleged Lack of "Jurisdiction"
DCSE argues that the courts never had "jurisdiction" to change the amount of child
support awarded to mother as father's initial petition requested only that he be awarded child support. We find this argument without merit.
When these parties divorced, the circuit court hearing the matter awarded child support to mother and referred further child support matters to the juvenile and domestic relations district (JDR) court. Father then filed a petition in JDR court asking that mother be required to pay child support to him and listing himself as the petitioner. DCSE claims that, given the request in father's petition, neither the JDR court nor any subsequent court acquired "jurisdiction" to adjust the child support paid to mother and, therefore, acted without authority when they amended the award. DCSE contends, in effect, that the courts only had authority to consider whether to grant the specific relief requested by father.

A trial court is not limited to child support requests made by the parties. As Code  20-108 makes clear, a court can even take action on its own motion:
The court may, from time to time after decreeing as provided in
 20-107.2, on petition of either of the parents, or on its own
motion or upon petition of any probation officer or the Department
of Social Services, which petition shall set forth the reasons for the
relief sought, revise and alter such decree concerning the care,
custody, and maintenance of the children and make a new decree
concerning the same, as the circumstances of the parents and the
benefit of the children may require.

Thus, precedent says that the Judge CAN make the child supportingfinding as he determines is best, XXXXX XXXXX child, by simply making a motion on its own, asking itself, if you will, to award child support to mother from father, if the facts so warrant.

Hope this helps to clarify. If it does, please click ACCEPT and follow up if needed after you do so. Also, if you exceeded the one question one answer standard, and the expert provided you with answers to your additional questions, BONUS is an appreciated way of saying thank you! This expert's credit proceeds go towards providing volunteer provisions for the disabled. Thank you for helping!

I believe I have answered your question and I hope you a better understanding of your legal issue as a result. As you know, I am only the messenger, not your attorney, nor can I create favorable law if it doesn't exist, so please don't hold it against me if the legal result is not what you wish. ACCEPTING the Answer a so ensures I will be able to assist your with your future legal question. In addition, Positive "FEEDBACK" and BONUSES are also appreciated. If you would like my assistance in the future, just put my name, STEPHANIE JOY, in your title or first sentence of a new post. Please keep in mind that I can only respond to your post and the information contained in it, as I do not know what you know unless you describe it fully. Also, due to site tech reasons, oftentimes I am initially only able to see the first part of your post, so I apologize in advance if it means more interactions between us. At times, there can also be a delay of an hour or more in between my answers because I may be helping other customers or taking a break, or if it is late at night, I may have to go get some shut eye til morning, but rest assured, I'll be back for you. Thanks

Sincerely,

S. Joy, Legal Expert

My Standard and Required Legal Disclaimer. The information given by me here is not legal advice. You should not and may not rely on anything on this website as legal advice and you agree that the nominal price you may voluntarily pay for information here clearly does not pay for any legal advice. I am neither establishing nor accepting an attorney-client relationship with you. You must hire an attorney in your state as a matter of law, in order to receive legal advice and attorney/client relationship and rights. I do not claim to be licensed to practice in the state where this information is being provided or whose law would apply, if any. My licensing credentials are noted in my profile, which you have full access to. As law is always changing, you are recommended to consult with the appropriate legal counsel in your jurisdiction for accurate and complete information. Thank you, XXXXX XXXXX a great day.