Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

McCarthy v. Goroshin

Supreme Court of Maine

July 7, 2016

KATE T. (GOROSHIN) MCCARTHY
v.
IGOR GOROSHIN

          Submitted On Briefs: April 21, 2016

         South Paris District Court docket number FM-2010-177

          On the briefs:

          Elliott L. Epstein, Esq., Owen Pickus, D.O., Esq. & Associates, Kennebunk, for appellant Igor Goroshin

          Sarah L. Glynn, Esq., Oxford Hills Law, South Paris, for appellee Kate T. (Goroshin) McCarthy

          Panel: SAUFLEY, C.J., and ALEXANDER, MEAD, GORMAN, HJELM, and HUMPHREY, JJ.

          HUMPHREY, J.

         [¶1] Igor Goroshin appeals from a judgment of the District Court (South Paris, L. Walker, J.) finding him in contempt for violating the 2011 divorce judgment ending his marriage to Kate T. (Goroshin) McCarthy and denying his motion to modify his child support obligation. Goroshin contends that the court erred by (A) finding him in contempt for nonpayment of child support for 2011, (B) finding him in contempt for nonpayment of child support for 2012, (C) finding that he had not fully paid his child support obligations for 2013 and 2014, (D) finding no substantial change in circumstances warranting a modification of his child support obligation, (E) determining that he was obligated to sell the marital home and split the proceeds, and (F) admitting a 2015 letter from an insurance carrier to McCarthy regarding the carrier's attempts to obtain paperwork from Goroshin in order to process McCarthy's 2013 vehicular accident claim. We vacate the judgment as to the court's finding of contempt for nonpayment of child support for 2012, but otherwise affirm.

         I. BACKGROUND

         [¶2] Goroshin and McCarthy, the parents of two minor children, were divorced by judgment of a Family Law Magistrate (Carlson, M.) issued on January 24, 2011. The court awarded primary residential care of the two children to McCarthy, with Goroshin having rights of contact with the children at all reasonable times; ordered Goroshin to pay McCarthy $182.40 per week in child support, commencing on July 29, 2011; and ordered that the marital home "be listed for sale, in a commercially reasonable manner. Pending the sale, [Goroshin] will be responsible for the payment of the debt on this property. When sold, if any profit remains, the parties will share it equally."

         [¶3] On June 18, 2014, McCarthy filed a motion for contempt alleging, inter alia, that Goroshin had failed to pay child support as ordered and had failed to list the marital property for sale. On June 25, 2014, Goroshin filed a motion to modify the divorce judgment seeking to set a new contact schedule and to reduce child support. On August 4, 2014, Goroshin moved for leave to amend his motion to modify to include an assertion that there had been a substantial change in his financial situation due to, among other things, a change in his employment status since the divorce judgment. He was granted leave to amend, and McCarthy's contempt motion was heard together with his amended motion to modify on March 5 and June 3, 2015.

         [¶4] In an order dated August 19, 2015, the court (L. Walker, J.) denied Goroshin's amended motion to modify the divorce judgment and granted McCarthy's motion for contempt, in part. Relevant to this appeal, regarding the amended motion to modify, the court found that there had not been a substantial change in circumstances that would justify a reduction in Goroshin's child support obligation or a modification of parental rights. Goroshin contended that there had been a substantial change in his earning capacity because of "his inability to achieve his earnings forecast as a medical marijuana farmer, " but the court concluded that his purported operating expenses were not substantiated and that "[t]he basic arithmetic involved in [his] calculation of revenue per patient . . . militates against a modification of his child support obligation." The court found that "there is a likelihood that within a year or so, [his marijuana] business will generate income that exceeds the amount presently used to calculate child support." Finally, the court found that although Goroshin "declined continued employment with [his previous employer] due to his strict refusal to take opioids to manage pain resulting from orthopedic surgeries . . . no evidence was presented regarding whether and to what extent . . . that pain limits [his] earning capacity."

          [¶5] Regarding the motion for contempt, the court found that although McCarthy had signed a quitclaim deed granting any interest she had in the marital property[1] to Goroshin in May 2013, this deed did not nullify the requirement in the divorce judgment that the marital home be sold and the proceeds split. The court concluded that Goroshin had not "been contemptuous in his failure to list the property for sale, " but it ordered him to list the property in a commercially reasonable manner within forty-five days or be found in contempt.

         [¶6] The court did find Goroshin in contempt for nonpayment of child support for 2011 and 2012. The court also found that he was in arrears for 2013 and 2014 despite his assertions that McCarthy had verbally agreed to accept $500 per month and the fact that he had paid this amount during those years. However, the court concluded, in light of the parties' alleged agreement to reduce Goroshin's child support obligation, that Goroshin had not "willfully violate[d]" the child support order; it therefore did ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.