# Huey v. Huey

> Court of Appeals of Arkansas · February 23, 2005 · 90 Ark. App. 98

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9619399

## Case

- **Full name:** James HUEY v. Sandra HUEY (SHEIRON)
- **Court:** Court of Appeals of Arkansas
- **Decided:** February 23, 2005
- **Citations:** 90 Ark. App. 98; 204 S.W.3d 92
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Baker
- **Judges:** Wendell L. Griffen
- **Cited by:** 6 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9619399

## Opinion text

Karen R. Baker, Judge, dissenting. I agree with the majority that the child-support guidelines expressly provide that, in setting child support, the trial judge must consider the last two years’ tax returns and the quarterly estimates for the current year. However, I cannot agree with the majority’s holding that the trial judge failed to consider the income from appellee’s medical practice for the first three months of 2003. As the judge’s findings of fact demonstrate, he did in fact consider it. He stated that, because appellee anticipated a loss in 2003, no quarterly estimates had been made, and that, after reviewing the 2002 tax return and “other financial information” very carefully, he concluded that appellee would “most likely have a loss in 2003.” Whether such a loss was likely was a finding of fact for the trial judge to make, and the amount of child support to award, in light of all relevant facts and the applicable law, lay within his sound discretion. I can only conclude, therefore, that the majority is reversing the trial judge’s factual determination that appellee had no income by saying that the trial judge made an error of law. Because I believe that his factual findings are not clearly erroneous and that he followed the law, I must dissent.
Hart, J., joins.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9619399. Public record. Not legal advice.