from the District Court of Campbell County The Honorable
William J. Edelman, Judge.
Representing Appellant: Rennie Polidora, Jacobs Polidora,
LLC, Laramie, Wyoming.
Representing Appellee: Peter K. Michael, Attorney General;
Misha Westby, Deputy Attorney General; Jill E. Kucera, Senior
Assistant Attorney General; Wendy S. Ross, Senior Assistant
BURKE, C.J., and HILL, DAVIS, FOX, and KAUTZ, JJ.
Appellant, TSR, appeals from the district court's order
modifying child support with respect to her daughter, LLB.
She claims the court abused its discretion in determining
child support. We affirm.
Appellant presents the following issues:
1. Whether the District Court abused its discretion by using
the matrix for two (2) children rather than one (1) child in
W.S. § 20-2-304 when it calculated a deviation from the
presumptive child support pursuant to W.S. § 20-2-
2. Whether the District Court erred when it did not make
specific findings in its Order for the reasons it granted a
deviation pursuant to W.S. § 20-2-307(b).
Appellant's daughter, LLB, was born in 2004. Her
relationship with LLB's father, DLB, ended shortly after
LLB's birth. In 2007, Mother petitioned to establish
paternity, child custody, visitation, and child support
relating to LLB. Following a hearing, the district court
entered an order that established DLB as LLB's father,
gave primary custody to Mother, awarded Father visitation,
and ordered Father to pay child support in the amount of
$484.30 per month, with an additional payment towards an
arrearage of $100.00 per month.
Father had another child, KSB, in 2008. He and the
child's mother subsequently married, and they live
together as an intact family. Father fell behind on his child
support obligation to Mother due to economic difficulties and
his obligation to support his second child.
In 2011, Mother and Father entered into an agreement
modifying Father's child support obligation. Pursuant to
the agreement, the district court determined that
Father's presumptive monthly child support was $660.98.
The parties agreed, however, that the court should deviate
from the presumptive child support amount because Father was
financially responsible for a later-born child living with
him. Accordingly, the court reduced Father's monthly