Wash. Rev. Code § 26.09.170

Section 26.09.170 requires a petition to modify when postsecondary support was reserved, because a motion for adjustment is not one of the statute’s exceptions, and no substantial-change threshold applies.

In Re The Marriage Of: Gregory Charles Morris v. Reyes · filed 2013-09-23(1), (6), (7)

A request for postsecondary educational support is not among the enumerated exceptions which can be accomplished by a motion for adjustment. A petition for modification is required. ... When postsecondary support has been reserved, the issue should be raised by a petition for modification. The decision should be made as if it were being decided in an initial dissolution proceeding. No substantial change of circumstances threshold applies.

Section 26.09.170(3) allows a court to modify postmajority support after a child turns 18 when the decree expressly provides for support beyond emancipation, so long as the motion is filed before support terminates.

In re the Marriage of Cota · filed 2013-11-05(3)

RCW 26.09.170(3) provides, “Unless otherwise agreed in writing or expressly provided in the decree, provisions for the support of a child are terminated by emancipation of the child.” ... Conversely, if a decree expressly provides for postmajority support, a court may modify such support as long as the movant files a motion to modify before the “termination of support”.

Accrued child support installments generally vest when due and cannot be modified, but equitable estoppel may bar a custodial parent's claim for arrears.

Hartman v. Smith · filed 1984-01-12

Retrospective support payments generally are not subject to modification because each installment vests when due. ... Equitable estoppel operates to bar respondent's claim in this case.

Section 26.09.170(3) permits child support beyond majority when the decree expressly provides for it; requiring support until a child is both emancipated and no longer dependent is sufficiently explicit.

In the Matter of Marriage of Nielsen · filed 1988-07-20(3)

Thus, a parent's duty to support children will terminate when the child is no longer economically dependent or reaches age 18, whichever occurs first, unless the court expressly orders support beyond the age of majority, either in the original decree or by modification. ... The language of the Nielsen decree, requiring support until the children were "emancipated and no longer dependent" is also sufficiently explicit to order postmajority child support. ... Accordingly, we hold that James's support obligation did not terminate automatically when Charlene reached the age of majority, but ended only upon the end of her dependency.

A decree providing support until a child is no longer in need of it is sufficiently explicit under subsection (3) to allow postmajority support while the child remains dependent.

Balch v. Balch · filed 1994-09-20(3)

The language here — "until they are no longer in need of support” — is similar to language in other decrees found by reviewing courts to be "sufficiently explicit” under RCW 26.09.170(3) to allow an order of post-majority support.

Subsection (8)(a) permits an adjustment based on changed parental income every 24 months, but the adjustment only conforms existing child support provisions to current circumstances.

In re the Marriage of Scanlon · filed 2001-11-19(8)(a)

An adjustment action therefore simply conforms existing provisions of a child support order to the parties’ current circumstances.

Section 26.09.170(1) permits a modified support order to be made retroactive to the date the modification petition was filed.

In Re The Marriage Of: Jeremy S. Weiss v. Weiss · filed 2014-11-24(1)

The court had authority to make the new support order retroactive to the date the modification petition was filed in February 2013.15.

Support provisions in a dissolution decree generally require an uncontemplated, substantial change in circumstances for modification.

In Re the Marriage of Shellenberger · filed 1995-12-11(1)

With some statutory exceptions not argued here, the support provisions in a dissolution decree are modifiable only on a showing of an uncontemplated, substantial change in circumstances. ... Accordingly, the record does not support the conclusion of the trial court (or of the court commissioner at the time of the temporary order) that Shellenberger’s disability was a contemplated change of circumstance which was not intended to provide a basis for modification of the college education clause.

Section 26.09.170 permits modification for substantially changed circumstances or, after one year, severe economic hardship, and permits adjustment without that showing in listed situations such as parental-income changes after 24 months.

In Re The Marriage Of: Kenneth B. Kaplan, Res/cross-app. And Sheila Kohls, App/cross-res. · filed 2016-06-13(5)(a), (6)(a), (7)(a), (7)(a)(i)

Upon reviewing these documents, the court may order modification of the child support order "based upon a showing ofsubstantially changed circumstances at any time." RCW 26.09.170(5)(a). ... In the absence of a substantial change in circumstances, a modification may be ordered if one or more years has passed since the last child support order was entered and "the order in practice works a severe economic hardship on either party or the child." RCW 26.09.170(6)(a). ... It may be ordered in certain, listed situations, which do not require demonstrating a substantial change in circumstances, RCW 26.09.170(7)(a), such as "[c]hanges in the income ofthe parents" if 24 months have passed since the date of entry of the last order, adjustment, or modification, whichever is later. RCW 26.09.170(7)(a)(i).

Section 26.09.170(5)(a) permits modification of a child support order upon substantially changed circumstances at any time, while subsection (7)(a) permits adjustment after two years without that showing based on specified changes in income or child-support standards.

In Re The Marriage Of: Stephen A. Burns, App. And Hiromi F. Burns (n/k/a/ Fujiki), Res. · filed 2020-08-03(5)(a), (7)(a)

A party to a child support order may petition for a modification based on a showing of substantially changed circumstances at any time. RCW 26.09.170(5)(a). If two years have passed from the order’s entry or last modification, the order may be adjusted without a showing of substantially changed circumstances based on changes in the parents’ income or changes in the economic table or standards in chapter 26.19 RCW. RCW 26.09.170(7)(a). ... She requested a modification based on a substantial change of circumstances that resulted in insufficient funds to meet the children’s needs. ... The court did not abuse its discretion in modifying the amount of the downward deviation instead of maintaining or eliminating it.

A child support order generally requires a substantial change to be modified, but after 24 months it may be adjusted for changes in the payor's income without that showing.

Jennifer Corinne Emery, V. Loren Heath Anderson · filed 2022-10-10(1), (9), (9)(a)(i)

Under RCW 26.09.170(1), a child support order generally may be modified “only upon a showing of a substantial change of circumstances.” However, under RCW 26.09.170(9), a substantial change of circumstances need not be shown “[i]f twenty-four months have passed from the date of the entry of the order,” in which case child support may be “adjusted . . . based upon . . . [c]hanges in the income of the person required to pay support.” RCW 26.09.170(9)(a)(i); see also In re Marriage of Scanlon, 109 Wn. App. 167, 173, 34 P.3d 877 (2001) (“[P]arties may adjust an order of child support every 24 months on a change of incomes, without showing a substantial change in circumstances.”). An adjustment under RCW 26.09.170(9) is a “routine action” that “simply conforms existing provisions of a child support order to the parties’ current circumstances.” Scanlon, 109 Wn. App. at 173.

Section 26.09.170 permits modification of a child support order upon a substantial change in circumstances, but after 24 months permits adjustment without that showing when either party's income has changed, initiated by motion and child support worksheets.

Alicia O'neil, V. O'neil · filed 2022-06-13(5)(a), (9)(a), (9)(a)(i), (9)(b)

The trial court’s authority is also supported by statute. RCW 26.09.170 controls modifications of maintenance and child support orders. RCW 26.09.170(5)(a) allows a party to petition for modification based on a substantial change in circumstances. Under RCW 26.09.170(9)(a), however, if 24 months have passed since entry of the order, a court may adjust the child support order without a showing of substantially changed circumstances. An adjustment is authorized where there have been changes in the income of either party. RCW 26.09.170(9)(a)(i); Scanlon, 109 Wn. App. at 173. 3 An adjustment may be initiated by either party by filing a motion and child support worksheets. RCW 26.09.170(9)(b).

After two years, subsection (7)(a) permits but does not require a child support adjustment based on a change in a parent’s income.

In the Matter of the Marriage of: Verity Battista & Alex Saha · filed 2021-04-08(7)(a)

Finally, although the information submitted by the parties indicated Ms. Battista’s income had increased, the superior court exercised reasonable discretion in denying an adjustment under RCW 26.09.170(7)(a). The court could have adjusted the child support based on Ms. Battista’s changed income, but was not required to do so. The statute says only that an order “may” be adjusted based on a change in income.

Section 26.09.170 permits maintenance modification for a substantial unanticipated change in circumstances, excludes voluntary unemployment or underemployment alone, limits modification to post-petition payments, and authorizes suspension rather than termination.

Royal Fish, Sr., Appellant/cross-respondent v. Lisa Fish, Respondent/cross-appellant · filed 2017-04-04(1)(b), (5)(b), (1)(a), (1)

Under RCW 26.09.170(1)(b), a court may modify a maintenance obligation when the moving party demonstrates a substantial change in circumstances occurred that the parties did not contemplate at the time of the initial dissolution decree. ... However, RCW 26.09.170(5)(b) states that “[a]n obligor’s voluntary unemployment or voluntary underemployment, by itself, is not a substantial change of circumstances.” ... If a court determines that a modification is appropriate, it may do so only for payments accruing after the petition for modification. RCW 26.09.170(1)(a); ... A trial court’s authority to modify maintenance obligations under RCW 26.09.170(1) includes the authority to suspend those obligations.

Section 26.09.170 permits maintenance modification for an unanticipated substantial change in circumstances, but voluntary unemployment or underemployment alone does not qualify.

In Re The Marriage Of Pamela And Robert Flagella · filed 2017-10-17(1)(b), (5)(b)

Under RCW 26.09.170(1)(b), a court may modify a maintenance obligation when the moving party demonstrates a substantial change in circumstances occurred that the parties did not contemplate at the time of the initial dissolution decree. ... However, RCW 26.09.170(5)(b) states that “[a]n obligor’s voluntary unemployment or voluntary underemployment, by itself, is not a substantial change of circumstances.” ... These facts provide tenable grounds for the trial court to conclude Robert did not establish a substantial change in circumstances. Thus, the trial court did not err in denying Robert’s motion for modification of the maintenance awards.

Section 26.09.170(1) requires a substantial change in circumstances before maintenance may be modified; a retirement-related hearing may revisit the issue but does not itself modify that requirement.

In Re The Marriage Of: Leslie Kay Lindskog, App v. Christopher Mark Burrows, Resp · filed 2018-04-09(1)

RCW 26.09.170(1) provides that maintenance may only be modified "upon a showing of a substantial change in circumstances." ... The final dissolution order does not and could not change the statutory standard for modification. Rather, it merely states that "the court shall make a determination whether modification is warranted" at the time of retirement. ... There is not a modification of the requirements of RCW 26.09.170(1) to show a substantial change with regards to his financial circumstances before maintenance could be modified.

A superior court may modify maintenance only when the moving party proves a substantial change of circumstances since the decree.

In Re The Marriage Of Judith Adams Oakes, V. Oakes · filed 2023-05-30(1)(b)

Under RCW 26.09.170(1)(b), the superior court may modify maintenance only when the moving party has shown a “substantial change of circumstances.”

A decree’s maintenance award may be modified when circumstances change.

In re the Marriage of Alexander · filed 1975-08-22

We conclude that the trial court’s modification, because of a change in circumstances, is in accord with the guidelines established in Kinne v. Kinne, 82 Wn.2d 360, 364, 510 P.2d 814 (1973), and contemplated in RCW 26.09.070 (3)... and RCW 26.09.170.

Section 26.09.170 permits modification of an order requiring insurance for maintenance when unforeseen circumstances arise, including uninsurability or a substantial increase in premiums.

In Re Marriage of Morrow · filed 1989-03-13

... the court still retains power to modify the order based on unforeseen circumstances. See RCW 26.09.170. Such circumstances would presumably include Mr. Morrow's possible uninsurability in the future or a substantial increase in the cost of insuring payment of his maintenance obligation.

Section 26.09.170 requires a change in circumstances to modify maintenance and does not specify the factors for setting the modified amount or duration.

Spreen v. Spreen · filed 2001-07-20(1)

Nor does RCW 26.09.170, the modification statute, state what factors the court should use when modifying maintenance. Modification cases primarily address whether substantial evidence supports a finding of changed circumstances. Nevertheless, once the court finds that changed circumstances warrant a modification, the issues of amount and duration are the same as in the original dissolution.

Section 26.09.170 allows modification of a child support order upon a substantial change in circumstances, after more than one year, or when the existing order causes severe economic hardship.

In Re The Marriage Of: Dana Lynn Gordon v. Gordon · filed 2017-11-13(1)

The trial court has authority to modify a child support order under various conditions, including a substantial change of circumstances, the passage of more than one year, and a showing that the original support order "in practice works a severe economic hardship on either party or the child."

Section 26.09.170(7) provides a two-year adjustment rule for child support, while § 26.09.170(1)(b) governs modification of spousal maintenance and requires a substantial change in circumstances.

Mcdermott v. Mcdermott · filed 2019-06-24(7), (1)(b)

RCW 26.09.170(7) addresses only child support, not spousal maintenance. ... RCW26.09.170(1), not RCW 26.09.170(7), governs modification of a maintenance award. ... In accord with the statute, it is well established that a court “may modify a maintenance award” only “when the moving party shows a substantial change in circumstances that the parties did not contemplate at the time of the dissolution decree.”

Section 26.09.170(1) permits maintenance to be modified only upon a substantial change in circumstances that the parties did not contemplate at the time of dissolution.

In the Matter of the Marriage of: Lori Van de Graaf & Rod D. Van de Graaf · filed 2019-08-29(1)

In accordance with RCW 26.09.170(1), maintenance may only be modified upon a showing of “a substantial change in circumstances that the parties did not contemplate at the time of the dissolution decree.” In re Marriage of Spreen, 107 Wn. App. 341, 346, 28 P.3d 769 (2001). “The phrase ‘change in circumstances’ refers to the financial ability of the obligor spouse to pay vis-à-vis the necessities of the other spouse.” Id. (quoting In re Marriage of Ochsner, 47 Wn. App. 520, 524, 736 P.2d 292 (1987)). Whether modification should be granted is reviewed for abuse of discretion. In re Marriage of Drlik, 121 Wn. App. 269, 274, 87 P.3d 1192 (2004).

Section 26.09.170(1)(b) permits modification of a spousal-support decree only when the moving party shows a substantial change in circumstances.

Duane Smith v. Marie Smith · filed 2019-09-09(1)(b)

A decree for spousal support may be modified "only upon a showing of a substantial change of circumstances." RCW 26.09.170(1)(b). Duane, however, cites only his own statement in an e-mail to Marie as support for his argument that he could not satisfy the $10,000 spousal maintenance. ... Duane did not provide paystubs or records of his bank accounts and therefore cannot show that there was a substantial change of circumstances.

Section 26.09.170(1)(b) allows a spousal maintenance order to be modified only when the moving party proves a substantial change in circumstances affecting the obligor’s ability to pay, and the change was not contemplated when the original order was entered.

Scholl v. Scholl · filed 2020-04-21(1)(b)

RCW 26.09.170(1)(b) provides that a spousal maintenance order may be modified “except as otherwise provided in this section, only upon a showing of a substantial change of circumstances.” ... The moving party has the burden of showing that a substantial change has occurred. ... Under RCW 26.09.170(1)(b), a change in circumstances affecting the obligor spouse’s ability to pay maintenance must have been a change “that the parties did not contemplate at the time of the dissolution decree.” ... We hold that Lee’s change in employment and reduction in guaranteed base pay was not contemplated when maintenance was originally ordered.

Section 26.09.170(1)(b) permits modification of a maintenance award when the moving party shows a substantial change in circumstances that the parties did not contemplate at the time of the dissolution decree.

In Re The Marriage Of: George Slyman, Resp v. Diana Sue Slyman, App · filed 2020-11-16(1)(b)

A court may modify a maintenance award when the moving party shows a “substantial change” in circumstances that the parties did not contemplate at the time of the dissolution decree.

Section 26.09.170(1) allows a spousal-maintenance decree to be modified only upon a showing of a substantial change in circumstances.

Kaufman v. Kaufman · filed 2021-04-27(1)

And under RCW 26.09.170(1), spousal maintenance decrees can be modified “only upon a showing of a substantial change of circumstances,” which Geoffrey has not alleged or shown.

Before a support order may be modified, the moving party must show a substantial change in circumstances.

Peggy Sue Smith, V. Smith · filed 2022-02-07(1)(b)

The trial court writing that it would consider “appropriate adjustment” does not contradict the court’s statutory obligation under RCW 26.09.170(1)(b), which provides that before a support order may be modified, there must be a substantial change in circumstances.

Section 26.09.170(1)(b) permits modification of a spousal maintenance order only upon a substantial change in circumstances, meaning an unanticipated change in the obligor's ability to pay relative to the other spouse's needs.

In Re The Marriage Of: Sarah Parsons, V. Chen · filed 2022-08-08(1)(b)

RCW 26.09.170(1)(b) provides that a spousal maintenance order may be modified “except as otherwise provided in this section, only upon a showing of a substantial change of circumstances.” “The phrase ‘change in circumstances’ refers to the financial ability of the obligor spouse to pay vis-à-vis the necessities of the other spouse.” In re Marriage of Spreen, 107 Wn. App. 341, 346, 28 P.3d 769 (2001) (quoting In re Marriage of Ochsner, 47 Wn. App. 520, 524, 736 P.2d 292 (1987)). A substantial change in circumstances is a change that was “not contemplated at the time the original order [of support] was entered.” In re Marriage of Morris, 176 Wn. App. 893, 902, 309 P.3d 767 (2013). The petitioner bears the burden of demonstrating a substantial change in circumstances warranting modification. Spreen v. Spreen, 107 Wn. App. 341, 346, 28 P.3d 769 (2001).

Section 26.09.170(1)(b) permits modification of spousal maintenance only when the moving party proves a substantial change of circumstances not contemplated when the decree was entered; the court need not consider initial-award factors unless that threshold is met.

In Re The Marriage Of: Scott Lee Grieben, V. Austin · filed 2022-09-12(1)(b)

A decree involving spousal maintenance may only be modified upon a showing of a substantial change of circumstances not within the contemplation of the parties at the time the decree was entered. ... However, the trial court need not consider these factors in deciding whether or not to modify spousal maintenance—it only needs to consider these factors if it decides that substantial change warrants modification. ... Under RCW 26.09.170, the burden of demonstrating the required change of circumstances to warrant modifying maintenance is on the party seeking modification.

Section 26.09.170(1) permits modification of spousal maintenance only upon a substantial change in circumstances not contemplated when the decree was entered, unless the separation agreement provides otherwise.

James Kim, V. Kum Kim, Aka Sarah Jung · filed 2023-11-27(1)

“In the absence of a provision in a separation agreement to the contrary, maintenance . . . may be modified . . . only upon the showing of a substantial change of circumstances that was not within the contemplation of the parties at the time the decree was entered.” In re Marriage of Ochsner, 47 Wn. App. 520, 524, 736 P.2d 292 (1987); RCW 26.09.170(1). A “change of circumstances” refers to “the financial ability of the obligor spouse to pay vis-à-vis the necessities of the other spouse.” Id. “The determination whether a substantial and material change has occurred which justifies modification of maintenance . . . is within the discretion of the trial court.” Id. at 524-25.

Section 26.09.170 requires a substantial change of circumstances before a court may modify support.

Wagner v. Wagner · filed 1980-02-25

The current statute relating to modification of support, RCW 26.09.170, ... and its predecessor, former RCW 26.08.110, require that a "substantial change of circumstances" be shown before a petition for modification will be granted.

A fact known to the parties when the original decree was entered does not establish a substantial change of circumstances for modifying support, even if the court did not know it.

In Re the Marriage of Zander · filed 1985-02-14

The crucial question is whether a fact known by the parties, but not by the court entering the original decree, may later be asserted as a substantial change of condition. We hold it may not.

Section 26.09.170 permits modification of maintenance or support only upon a substantial change of circumstances.

Holaday v. Merceri · filed 1987-05-28

A dissolution decree respecting maintenance or support may be modified only upon a showing of a substantial change of circumstances. RCW 26.09.170.

Section 26.09.170 generally requires a substantial change in circumstances to modify child support, but permits modification or adjustment without that showing in specified circumstances, including severe economic hardship, the need to finish high school, changed income after two years, and a hardship-based phased increase.

Sekou Wiggs, Sr. v. St. Clair · filed 2020-07-27(1), (5)(a), (6)(a), (6)(b), (7)(a), (7)(c)

RCW 26.09.170 governs a parent’s ability to modify a child support order. Modifications are generally limited to situations in which there has been a “substantial change of circumstances.” RCW 26.09.170(1). A petition may be filed on this basis at any time. RCW 26.09.170(5)(a). As an exception to this general rule, a parent may request a modification one year or more after it has been entered without showing a substantial change in circumstances if the original order “works a severe economic hardship on either party or the child” or if “there is a need to extend support beyond the eighteenth birthday to complete high school.” RCW 26.09.170(6)(a), (b). Likewise, a parent can file a motion for adjustment without showing a substantial change of circumstances when two years have passed since entry of the last adjustment or modification and the parents’ income has changed. RCW 26.09.170(7)(a). ... That statute provides that “[i]f the court adjusts or modifies a child support obligation pursuant to this subsection by more than thirty percent and the change would cause significant hardship, the court may implement the change in two equal increments, one at the time of the entry of the order and the second six months from the entry of the order.” The superior court based its decision on Wiggs’s lack of credibility regarding his financial situation. This decision was not an abuse of discretion.

RCW 26.09.170 requires evidence of changed circumstances or other justification before a child support order may be modified; absent that showing, the order must be enforced according to its terms.

In re the Marriage of Zandi · filed 2017-02-23(5)-(7)

Generally, absent a showing of changed circumstances to justify modification, a child support order must be enforced according to its terms.

Section 26.09.170(5)(a) permits a party to a child support order to seek modification at any time upon a showing of substantially changed circumstances, while section 26.09.170(1)(a) limits modification to subsequent installments.

Juliette Leilani Gaines, V. Gaines · filed 2022-11-01(5)(a), (1)(a)

“A party to an order of child support may petition for a modification based upon a showing of substantially changed circumstances at any time.” RCW 26.09.170(5)(a). We review a decision to grant or deny modification of child support for abuse of discretion, which occurs when the superior court’s decision rests on untenable grounds. In re Marriage of Dodd, 120 Wn. App. 638, 644, 86 P.3d 801 (2004). Any modification of Gaines’s child support obligation would affect only subsequent installments. RCW 26.09.170(1)(a).

Section 26.09.170(1) generally requires a petition for modification and a substantial change in circumstances before a child support order may be altered.

Alexander Hoag, V. Carol Ann Hoag (aka Slater) · filed 2025-01-06(1)

“Generally, a child support order can only be altered following a petition for modification and upon a showing of a substantial change of circumstances.” In re Marriage of Morris, 176 Wn. App. 893, 901, 309 P.3d 767 (2013); RCW 26.09.170(1). The party requesting modification of a CSO must adhere to the specific procedural rules of RCW 26.09.170, including filing a petition with financial worksheets and serving the other party. RCW 26.09.175(1), (2).

Section 26.09.170 allows a parent to seek modification for children's counseling expenses if the parent shows the expenses were unforeseeable when the agreement was made.

In Re the Marriage of Babbitt · filed 1987-12-30

The wife is not precluded by our resolution of the child support issues from petitioning the court for payment of the counseling expenses, ... provided she ... meets her burden of showing such expenses were unforeseeable at the time the agreement was made. See RCW 26.09.170; Holaday, at 331 (modification allowed only upon a showing of a substantial, uncontemplated change of circumstances occurring since former decree).

Section 26.09.170 permits a child-support modification to apply to installments accruing after the motion for modification was filed.

In the Matter of Marriage of Oblizalo · filed 1989-07-20

Here, the petition was filed in 1984. The court was within its authority and discretion to order modification as to any installment accruing after that date.

A child support obligation remains in effect until a court changes it following a motion for adjustment or a petition for modification.

In re the Marriage of Waters · filed 2002-11-18(9)(a)

The court action necessary to change child support is an order following motion for adjustment or a petition for modification.

Section 26.09.170(1)(b) permits modification of maintenance or support only upon a substantial change in circumstances, while subsection (6)(a) permits modification of a child-support order one year or more after entry without that showing when the order causes severe economic hardship.

In Re The Marriage Of: Zeleke Kassahun v. Ashagari · filed 2017-12-11(1)(b); (6)(a)

Unless a separation contract so provide a maintenance or support decree may be modified only upon a showing of a su stantial change in circumstances. ... "An order of child support may be mod fied one year or more after it has been entered without a showing of substantiall changed circumstances:(a) If the order in practice works a severe economic ha dship on either party or the child."

Absent contrary language in a support order, Washington law presumes that spousal maintenance ends when the recipient remarries; the court is not required to terminate it when such language provides otherwise.

Brett v. Martin · filed 2019-05-20(2)

This contrasts with Washington law, which presumes that an order will terminate upon the support recipient's remarriage unless it contains language to the contrary. ... In a spousal support order, the effect of remarriage is simply a durational requirement. In Washington, courts are not bound to terminate the requirement of spousal support upon the recipient's remarriage; it is simply the presumption when no language to the contrary provides otherwise.

Section 26.09.170(1) limits modification of a marriage dissolution decree unless conditions justify reopening the judgment.

Daniels v. Daniels Jr. · filed 2020-12-15(1)

Moreover, RCW 26.09.170(1), which governs the modification of marriage dissolution decrees, prohibits the trial court from modifying “‘its own decree in the absence of conditions justifying the reopening of the judgment.’”

Section 26.09.170 does not bar reimbursement of support payments made under a void decree because a void decree creates no support obligation.

In re the Marriage of Hardt · filed 1985-01-10

The State also alleges RCW 26.09.170 prohibits Mr. Hardt from obtaining reimbursement for his past child support payments. ... But this statute assumes one has a support obligation. Because we find the dissolution ... decree void, Mr. Hardt has no obligation to pay; therefore this statute does not control.