Cassandra C. v. Henry B. — West Virginia appellate court affirms child-support award for two minor children

Case
Cassandra C. v. Henry B.
Court
Intermediate Court of Appeals of West Virginia
Judge
Chief Judge Daniel W. Greear; Judge Charles O. Lorensen; Judge S. Ryan White
Date Decided
August 27, 2026
Docket No.
26-ICA-75
Topics
Child support; Divorce; Adult children; Family law
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

Cassandra C. (Mother) and Henry B. (Father) married in 2007 and divorced in January 2026. They have three children: one adult child and two minor children. The Family Court of Greenbrier County gave Mother primary custodial responsibility for the minor children and ordered Father to pay $939.72 per month in support for them.

The family court did not include the parties’ oldest child in the support calculation. That child was 18, was participating in a GED program sponsored by the county board of education, and was not enrolled in high school or post-secondary schooling. Mother, representing herself, appealed and argued that Father should also have been ordered to support the adult child.

The Court’s Holding

The Intermediate Court of Appeals affirmed the divorce order. Under West Virginia Code § 48-11-103(a), support may continue after a child turns 18 only if all statutory requirements are met, including enrollment as a full-time student in a secondary educational or vocational program and substantial progress toward a diploma.

Mother did not establish that the adult child was enrolled full time in a qualifying program. The court therefore found no error or abuse of discretion in limiting Father’s support obligation to the two minor children. It also declined to consider facts and documents Mother presented on appeal that were not part of the family-court record.

Key Takeaways

  • Post-majority child support requires proof that every condition in West Virginia Code § 48-11-103(a) is satisfied.
  • Participation in a GED program, without proof of qualifying full-time enrollment, did not establish entitlement to continued support here.
  • Appellate review is confined to the record developed in the family court.

Why It Matters

The decision underscores the evidentiary burden for a parent seeking support beyond a child’s eighteenth birthday. A court cannot extend support based on an adult child’s educational activity alone; the statutory requirements, including full-time enrollment in a qualifying program, must be established in the family court record.

✉️ Get tomorrow’s cases before your first coffee
Daily Case Law is our free morning digest — the most substantive new decisions, filtered to your jurisdictions and topics, each linking back here for the full analysis.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top