This opinion will be unpublished and

may not be cited except as provided by

Minn. Stat. ß 480A.08, subd. 3 (1998)






In Re the Marriage of:


Suzanne Marie Honzay, petitioner,





Larry Gene Jordet,




Filed June 27, 2000

Reversed and remanded

Shumaker, Judge


Renville County District Court

File No. F09054




John Kallestad, Beccue & Kallestad, P.O. Box 1126, 316 West Fourth Street, Willmar, MN 56201 (for appellant)


Jon C. Saunders, Anderson, Larson, Hanson & Saunders, PLLP, 331 Professional Plaza, 331 S.W. Third Street, P.O. Box 130, Willmar, MN 56201 (for respondent)



††††††††††† Considered and decided by Schumacher, Presiding Judge, Harten, Judge, and Shumaker, Judge.



U N P U B L I S H E D† †O P I N I O N




Appellant Suzanne Honzay contends that the district court erred by failing to make adequate findings to support its modification of the magistrateís child support order.† We reverse and remand.



††††††††††† Alleging that respondent Larry Jordetís income had substantially increased, appellant Suzanne Honzay moved to increase the amount of child support Jordet was required to pay.

A child-support magistrate granted the motion and increased Jordetís monthly obligation from $288 to $407.60.† The magistrate found that Jordetís monthly net income had increased from $842.41 to $1,390.25.† The magistrate also found that Jordet was obligated to pay support for another child and that obligation required an adjustment of Jordetís monthly income to $1,202.† To that amount, the magistrate applied the child-support guidelines in Minn. Stat. ß 518.551, subd. 5 (1998).

Jordet moved for review by the district court.† The court modified Jordetís monthly medical-insurance deduction from $78.98 to $157.96, vacated the magistrateís adjustment of income because of Jordetís second support obligation, and decreased Jordetís monthly child-support obligation to Honzay to $293.54.† Honzay appeals.


Modification of child support is within the district courtís discretion and will not be reversed absent an abuse of discretion.† Kuronen v. Kuronen, 499 N.W.2d 51, 53 (Minn. App. 1993), review denied (Minn. June 22, 1993).† This court will reverse the district courtís decision for abuse of that discretion only when the district courtís resolution of the issue is against logic and the facts on the record.† Id.

††††††††††† If a district court modifies any findings of a child-support magistrate, the court must itself make specific findings or conclusions as to the modifications.† Minn. R. Gen. Pract. 372.05, subd. 2.† Here, the court made specific findings as to the modification of Jordetís net monthly income.† The court also stated that it considered the needs of all of Jordetís children in determining an appropriate child-support amount.† But the court made no findings to support reduction of the magistrateís award by $114.† Under Minn. Stat. ß 518.551, subd. 5(i) (1998), an obligorís income is the only required finding where support awarded is consistent with the child-support guidelines.† But here, the support was not consistent with the guidelines.† Rather, it was $100 below the proper guidelines calculation ($1,310 x .3 = $393).†

††††††††††† Because the court made no finding to support a child-support award $100 below the guidelines amount, we reverse and remand.

Reversed and remanded.