F.S. v. M.S. — Hawaii appeals court partly vacates financial and child-support rulings

Case
F.S. v. M.S.
Court
Intermediate Court of Appeals of the State of Hawaiʻi
Judge
Clyde J. Wadsworth; Sonja M.P. McCullen; Daniel M. Gluck
Date Decided
October 20, 2026
Docket No.
CAAP-25-0000635
Topics
Child support; Parent coordinator; Family law; Appellate jurisdiction
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

F.S. (Father) and M.S. (Mother) divorced in 2016 and have one child. Their divorce decree required use of parent coordinators for unresolved custody issues and provided that, if the parties could not agree on coordinators, each would submit a name and the family court would decide. After the parties’ agreed parent coordinator stepped down in 2024, the Family Court appointed Dr. Lori Love and ordered Mother to cooperate.

Father later sought enforcement of orders concerning the parent coordinator and fees. Mother sought a financial evaluation, termination of parent-coordinator services or lower-cost mediation, and relief from prior fee and coordinator orders. The Family Court denied Mother’s motion, found her assertions about her finances not credible, and terminated Father’s $2,229 monthly child-support obligation while Father recouped sums he had paid for Mother’s share of coordinator costs and court-ordered fees.

The Court’s Holding

The Intermediate Court of Appeals affirmed most of the challenged rulings. It held that Mother’s appeal of the order vacating reconsideration and the attorney-fee order was untimely. The court also upheld the appointment of the parent coordinator because the divorce decree, preserved by the parties’ stipulation, authorized the Family Court to select a coordinator when the parties could not agree.

The court vacated the denial of Mother’s financial-evaluation motion and the related October 29, 2025 findings and conclusions. Because the relevant hearings were not evidentiary hearings, the Family Court could not make factual findings based on Mother’s supposed testimony or credibility determinations based on her arguments. The court also vacated the child-support termination: even when exceptional circumstances support a deviation, the Family Court must first use the Hawaiʻi Child Support Guidelines Worksheet. On remand, the Family Court must recalculate child support nunc pro tunc to July 28, 2025.

Key Takeaways

  • Arguments at a non-evidentiary hearing are not evidence and cannot support credibility findings.
  • A court modifying child support must use the Guidelines Worksheet before departing from the calculated amount.
  • Final post-decree orders must be appealed within the applicable deadline.

Why It Matters

The decision reinforces procedural limits in family-court litigation. Courts may enforce parent-coordinator arrangements authorized by a divorce decree, but financial and child-support rulings must rest on an appropriate evidentiary record and the required guideline calculation.

✉️ 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