Court of Appeals of Ohio, Eleventh District, Ashtabula
JAMES A. TRUCKEY, Plaintiff-Appellee,
STEPHANIE J. TRUCKEY, n.k.a. BOCZAR, Defendant-Appellant.
from the Ashtabula County Court of Common Pleas, Case No.
2012 DR 0297.
Reversed and remanded.
Stewart Douglas, OH 44047 (For Plaintiff-Appellee).
S. Okin, Dworken & Bernstein Co., LPA, OH 44077 (For
JANE TRAPP, J.
Appellant, Stephanie J. Truckey, n.k.a. Boczar ("Ms.
Boczar"), appeals from the judgment of the Ashtabula
County Court of Common Pleas overruling her objections to a
magistrate's decision and denying her motion to modify
child support. After a careful review of the record and
pertinent law, we reverse the trial court's judgment and
History and Procedural Background
Ms. Boczar and appellee, James A. Truckey ("Mr.
Truckey"), were divorced on April 2, 2013. A child
support guideline worksheet attached to their divorce decree
set Mr. Truckey's child support obligation at $717.72 per
month, or $358.86 per month per child. Pursuant to the terms
of the shared parenting plan adopted by the divorce decree,
the parties deviated the child support obligation to zero.
On June 4, 2013, Ms. Boczar filed a motion to terminate
and/or modify the shared parenting plan. The parties resolved
this motion pursuant to an agreed judgment entry dated May
28, 2014. The agreed judgment entry continued the prior
support order deviating Mr. Truckey's support obligation
On November 6, 2015, Ms. Boczar filed a motion to modify
child support with an affidavit asserting that "a newly
calculated child support amount will be more than Ten Percent
(10%) greater than the existing order."
A magistrate heard the motion to modify on December 6, 2017,
along with two other pending motions. On February 12, 2018,
the magistrate issued a decision recommending that the trial
court deny Ms. Boczar's motion to modify. The magistrate
found that the child support worksheet "does show that
based on the income of the parties, calculated support is a
10% change from $0." The magistrate concluded, however,
"there has not been a substantial change of
circumstances pursuant to R.C. §3119.79(C) to warrant a
modification of the child support order."
Ms. Boczar filed objections to the magistrate's decision,
and for purposes of the objections, Ms. Boczar accepted the
magistrate's findings of facts and challenged the
decision solely on the magistrate's application of the
The trial court overruled Ms. Boczar's objections and
denied her motion to modify.
Ms. Boczar now appeals, bringing the following assignment ...