SHEEDEH LYTZ v. JASON LYTZ

With regard to the cap on the number of child care hours and the amount payable per hour, that limitation was superceded by the Court’s 6/13/2025 Findings and Order After Hearing, which clearly states that the parties are to share such expenses 50%-50%. Therefore, as to child support, the Court orders as follows:

1. Effective as of 5/1/2026, Father shall pay to Mother as and for guideline child support the sum of $645/month ($243/month for the benefit of Izabella and $402/month for the benefit of Kellan), payable on or before the day of each month.

2. To the extent that Father’s income exceeds $25,000/month, Father shall pay bonus child support on such income in excess of $25,000 in accordance with the bonus table attached to the Xspouse calculation as Exhibit “A.”

3. To the extent that Mother’s income exceeds $15,417/month, Father shall receive a credit against his child support payment for the income Mother receives in excess of $15,417, calculated in accordance with the bonus table attached to the Xspouse calculation as Exhibit “B.”

a. Unless the parties agree otherwise, the party whose income exceeds the amount designated in the attached Xspouse calculation shall report to the other party, and provide verification of any such excess income, within 15 days of receiving such additional income. Father shall pay bonus child support to Mother within 30 days of receiving such income. In the event Mother has bonus income, Father will receive a credit, which amount shall be deducted from his next monthly child support payment.

4. Child support shall continue until (1) each child reaches the age of 18, or if still a full- time student in high school at age 18, until the children reaches age 19 or graduates from high school, whichever first occurs; (2) the child dies; or (3) the child is emancipated. The amount of child support is modifiable if there is a material change of circumstances for either party.

FL000252

5. In addition, per Family Code §§4061(b) and 4062, the parties shall share equally share (50%-50%) all reasonable, uninsured medical expenses and dental expenses incurred on behalf of the children, as well as childcare costs related to either party’s employment or reasonably necessary education or training for employment skills.

6. Father shall pay the sum of $2,282.80 in childcare expenses owing to Mother no later than 8/21/2026.

The parties are ordered to comply with the provisions of Family Code §4063 in seeking reimbursement for uninsured medical and dental expenses. A copy of the NOTICE OF RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES – Health-Care Costs and Reimbursement Procedures is attached to the Order After Hearing.

Spousal Support

Father requests that his permanent spousal support obligation be reduced to zero, or alternatively, for the Court to make another reduction in his obligation due to an increase in Mother’s income and the fact that she now has property tax and mortgage interest deductions as a result of her buying a house. Although the Court has discretion to make a modification to permanent spousal support, the Court is not persuaded that the facts presented warrant such a modification. Unlike the issue of child support, which looks to the parties’ current income to ensure that both are contributing to meet the needs of the children, permanent spousal support takes account of a much larger range of issues, as reflected in the Family Code §4320 factors, all of which have been considered by the Court, including the fact that this was a long-term marriage of 10 1⁄2 years, that Mother was out of the work for years raising the parties’ children.

Moreover, it will continue to make Mother years to meet the marital standard of living.

Last year Father’s spousal support obligation was reduced because his income dropped by 25%. Father currently has the same ability to pay spousal support as he did as of the 2025 modification. There is no hardship to him in continuing to pay the support he was ordered to pay after the Court’s full consideration of the §4320 factors. Mother has done exactly what was expected of her; she returned to the work force after a number of years of not working outside the home, secured a job practicing law, found a better paying job and has received an increase in pay. The Court will not penalize her for doing so; she is entitled to rely upon continued receipt of spousal support payments to pay her monthly expenses.

Taking into account the fact that this was a long-term marriage of 10 and 1⁄2 years, that Mother devoted most of her time during the marriage to raising the parties’ children, that there has been no further change in Father’s ability to pay, the Court finds reducing Mother’s spousal support payments would place an undue hardship on her in meeting her monthly expenses. The balance of hardships clearly weighs in favor of Father continuing to meet his obligation to pay Mother pay spousal per the Court’s 6/13/2025 Findings and Order After Hearing.

Having reviewed and considered all of the parties’ written submissions, including their lengthy §4320 analyses, the Court orders as follows:

FL000252

7. Father’s requests to set spousal support at zero, or alternatively, to further reduce his monthly spousal support payments, are denied.

Attorneys’ Fees & Costs

Father’s Request for Fees & Costs per Family Code §271.

Father asks for attorneys’ fees and costs per Family Code §271. He contends that Mother failed to comply with notification terms set out in the parties’ Marital Settlement Agreement (“MSA,” merged into the Judgment entered 12/5/2024) with regard to her change of employment, new address, and purchase of home with related mortgage interest and property tax deductions. Given the language of the cited MSA provisions and the evidence produced by Mother, the Court is not satisfied that any of Mother’s actions support an award of §271 fees. Therefore:

8. Father’s request for attorneys’ fees and costs per Family Code § 271 is denied.

Mother’s request for attorneys’ fees and costs per Family Code §§2030 and 271.

Mother requests attorneys’ fees of $10,000 pursuant to §§2030 and 271. The Court does not find that Father’s actions support an award of § 271 fees, and further finds Mother can pay her own attorneys’ fee and costs.

9. Mother’s request for attorney’s fees is denied.

SO ORDERED.

The Court will prepare the order

Any party who disagrees with the Court's tentative ruling and wishes to have oral argument must notify the Court at (415) 444-7046 and opposing counsel (or if the opposing party is selfrepresented, notice must be given directly to the opposing party) of their intent to appear at the hearing for oral argument by 4:00 pm on the court day before the hearing, as required by Marin County Superior Court Family Law Local Rules 7.12(B) and (C). Notice may be given by telephone or in person. Absent proper notice, no oral argument will be permitted. If no request for oral argument is made, the tentative ruling will become the order of the Court.

Unless otherwise ordered by the Court, persons who requested oral argument must appear for the hearing in person or remotely via Zoom, in accordance with the Court website guidelines. If appearing remotely via Zoom (video or telephone), you are responsible for ensuring you have adequate connectivity; the Court may proceed in a party’s absence if technical issues arise. Proper Zoom etiquette and courtroom decorum are required, and failure to comply may result in the hearing being halted and an order to appear in person being made.

lytz v. lytz 7-22-26.xsp

2026 Xspouse 2026-1-CA Monthly Figures Fixed Shares dason Sheedsh Monthly Figures Cash Flow Number of children 1 1 2026 Guideling Proposed Percent time with NCP 49.99% 49.99% Combined net spendable 28062 28251 Filing status HH/MLA = HH/MLA GUIDELINE Percent change 0% 1% Number of exemptions 2 2 lets (adjusted) Jason Wages and salary 25000 15417 Self employed income 0 0 Jason 15683 Payment cost/benefit -645 623 Other taxable income 1175 431 Sheedeh 42380 Net spendable income 15037 15059 TANF CS received Total 28063 Change from guideline 0 22 Support % of combined spendable 54% 53%

FTG FONACVCCGCOAD Other nontaxable income Addons 0 % of saving over guideline 0% 12%

eSPrO00909D New spouse income Employee 401-k contribution Guideln CS 6450 pealep. taxes 9185 9212 Adjustments to income Marin SS exemption value 0 0 SS paid prev marriage Total 645 # withholding allowances 0 0 CS paid prev marriage - Net wage paycheck 15868 15868 Health insurance 130 Settings changed Sheedsh Other medical expenses {Payment cost/benefit 645 812 Property tax expenses f=) Net spendable income 13025 13192 nN So S

Ded interest expense Change from guideline 0 167 Contribution deduction cs “ % of combined spendable 46% 47% Misc tax deductions 5 - en Total 507 % of saving over guideline 0% 88% Qualified business income deduction. 199 Total taxes 2815 2600 Required union dues ile 4 Dep. exemption value 0 0 Mandatory retirement ereases ° # withholding allowances 0 0 Hardship deduction Net wage paycheck 10451 10451 Other GDL deductions Child care expenses

Jason pays Guideline CS, Proposed CS

FC 4055 checking: ON Per Child Information BOB Timeshare ece(F) ece(hl} Addons Payor Basic CS Payor Pres C5 Payor All children 50-50 0 0 Q Jason 645 Jason 645 Jason Izabella 2014-10-14 49-51 0. 0 _ Qdason 243 Jason 243 Jason Kellan 2016-02-22 50 - 50 euperior Coug of California 9 jason 402 Jason 402 Jason County of Marin