David Benjamin Carlson v. Ekama Onofiok Carlson

1 SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA 2 COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 3 UNIFIED FAMILY COURT 4

5) 6 DAVID BENJAMIN CARLSON,) Case Number: FDI-24-799426) 7 Petitioner) Hearing Date: September 1, 2026) 8 VS.) Hearing Time: 9:00 AM) 9 EKAMA ONOFIOK CARLSON,) Department: 404) 10 Respondent) Presiding: AI MORI) 11) 12 OTHER REVIEW HEARING 13 TENTATIVE RULING 14

15 At the 9/1/2026 hearing, the Court intends to adopt the following findings and orders absent 16 good cause shown. The parties are ordered to appear in person or via Zoom video at 9am on 17 9/1/2026 in Department 404 to discuss Father’s request that the Court appoint a third-party 18 accountant to manage the yearly support true-up. If a party chooses to appear by Zoom, that party 19 must abide by the Notice and Instructions for Remote Appearance in San Francisco Family Court 20 set forth above. 21

22 A. Procedural History 23 1) The parties are Petitioner David Carlson (Father) and Respondent Ekama Carlson (Mother). The 24 parties married on 3/31/2012. While the parties disagree regarding their exact date of separation, 25 they agree they separated in early 2024, for a marriage of at least 11 years. The parties have two 26 minor children, Basse (DOB: 12/26/2014) and Esien (DOB: 4/23/2021). Both parties are 27 currently self-represented. 28 2) At the prior 10/9/2025 hearing (per the Findings and Order After Hearing filed 10/17/2025), the 29 Court adopted its Tentative Ruling (without objections) which requires Mother to pay Father

1 effective 11/1/2025 $1,954 per month for guideline child support and $1,894 per month for 2 temporary guideline espousal support, for a total of $3,848 per month. The support calculation 3 includes an imputation of $100,000 in annual income to Father and Mother’s earning $10,000 per 4 month in salary, $15,000 per month in self-employment income, and $1,218 per month in other 5 taxable income. The Court noted that the Work Search Order against Father remained in effect. A 6 review hearing was set for 3/3/2026 (which was later continued to 3/17/2026). 7 3) On 2/23/2026, Father filed a Declaration Regarding Work Search and Employment Status.

Father 8 states, “Respondent has not paid me spousal support since she filed her TRO in June 2025 and 9 owes me over $40,000 in support arrears... The current situation is not sustainable for me...The 10 Court is already imputing me income of $100,000 per year, which seriously reduces the support 11 order and is unsustainable for me. Given my employment and income history, imputing any 12 higher level of income when I have been actively seeking work would be detrimental to our 13 children as I can already not afford to pay for basic living expenses.” 14 4) On 2/24/2026, Mother filed a Declaration.

Mother states her actual monthly income in 2025 15 averaged $15,380, which is approximately $10,000 less per month than what the current support 16 order is based on. Mother asks the Court to base the current support obligation upon Mother’s 17 earning $15,000 (i.e., $11,916 per month in W2 income and $3,084 per month in self- 18 employment income). Mother states that any income earned above $15,000 can be captured in an 19 annual true-up. Mother asks the Court to impute $155,000 in income to Father in line with the 20 vocational evaluation report prepared by Soma McCandless dated 4/17/2025.

Mother attached 21 Ms. McCandless’ report to her declaration. It states, “Based on his education, experience, and the 22 figures above, Mr. Carlson could expect to earn a base salary in the range of $100,000 to 23 $155,000 per year in the above-mentioned roles...After returning to full-time work and having 24 recent work experience, if successful, Mr. Carlson can increase his future earnings.” Mother 25 states Father is not actually spending 10 hours per week seeking work or applying to 5 jobs per 26 week.

Mother states she has been unable to keep up with Court-ordered spousal support payments 27 due to financial hardship caused by Father’s ongoing litigation. 28 5) On 3/11/2026, Father filed a Response. Father disputes Mother’s claims that he is not diligently 29 seeking work, that he abused Mother, and that he should be imputed with additional income.

1 Father states that Mother’s dip in income in 2025 was temporary and a one-time event and that 2 Mother states herself that collections improved in September 2025. Father also states that if 3 Mother did overpay support in 2025, the parties have a true up in place to handle reimbursement 4 to the other party. Father also accuses Mother of not earning to her capacity. Father states that 5 Mother’s current reported income of ~$15,000 per month is 2-3 times less than what is currently 6 available in the job market and 3 times less than what Mother earned at her previous job at 7 Kaiser.

Father asks the Court to maintain the current support orders, order Mother to seek work if 8 she is unable to increase her earning capacity to her previous income at Kaiser, and order 9 discovery of her business’ books before the 2025 true up. 10 6) Following the 3/17/2026 review hearing, the Court issued a Findings and Order After Hearing on 11 4/17/2026 which reserves jurisdiction to modify child and temporary spousal support retroactive 12 to the date Father begins his new job. The Court also denied Mother’s request to impute 13 additional income to Father, and denied Mother’s request to modify child and temporary spousal 14 support retroactive to a date preceding the date Father begins his new job.

The Court further 15 reserved jurisdiction over what may be owed for the 2024 support true-up, ordered the parties to 16 meet and confer on this issue, and ordered the parties to file a new Request for Order if they were 17 unable to reach an agreement. The Court set a future hearing date of 6/30/2026 (which was later 18 continued to 9/1/2026) to determine (a) whether to modify child and temporary spousal support 19 retroactive to the date Father began his new job to take into account (i) Father’s new employment 20 earnings and (ii) possibly lowered base income and self-employment income for Mother; and (b) 21 whether the Temporary Restraining Order filed 3/9/2026 should be modified to permit channels 22 of communication between the parties regarding legal issues (e.g., how the parties can 23 communicate to calculate support true-ups). 24 7) On 6/24/2026, Father filed an Income and Expense Declaration.

Father states that he is 44 years 25 old and has a B.S. in Biochemistry and Molecular Biology and an M.S. in Financial Analysis. 26 Father also indicates that he has passed the SIE, Series 86, and Series 87 examinations. Father 27 states that he has worked as a retail sales associate for Beverages & More since 3/16/2026, where 28 he works 5 hours per week and is paid $19.20 per hour. Father also states that he has worked as a 29 retail sales professional for Xfinity since 3/30/2026, where he works 40 hours per week and earns

1 $19.20 per hour. Father further states that he has been self-employed for David Carlson 2 Consulting LLC (which is a biotech consulting business) since 4/27/2026, for which he works 13 3 hours per month in billable hours and is paid $150 per hour. Father states that last month he 4 earned the following amounts: $3,311 in salary and wages, $214 in overtime, $1,823 in 5 commissions or bonuses, and $1,404 in net self-employment income. Father states that his 6 monthly expenses total $7,185. Father states that he has $6,047 in liquid savings and $2,000 in 7 personal property.

Father states that he owes $21,329 in student loans, $1,677 in credit card debt, 8 and $113,000 for a personal loan which he states was incurred to pay attorney’s fees. 9 8) On 6/24/2026, Father filed a Declaration Regarding New Jobs. Father states that his current 10 employment at Xfinity is full-time with benefits, and he foresees a potential path to success 11 within the company as a manager, business-sales representation, or a transfer within the company 12 to the finance department. Father states he expects to earn $61,000 per year through his position 13 with Xfinity.

Father states that he also began working at BevMo in March 2026 and works every 14 chance he can get, including closing every Monday, which means that he works 12+ hour days on 15 Monday working at Xfinity and then Bevmo. Father states that his work for Bevmo is a “nice 16 supplement to my income.” Father also states that he has formed David Carlson Consulting LLC 17 and works as a biotech consultant with TheraVac Biologics. Father states that he his agreement is 18 limited to 20 hours per month (at a rate of $150 per hour), but they are “discussing a permanent 19 position that could become available in the Fall.”

Father states that he estimates he is currently 20 able to earn $102,000 per year, and agrees for that figure to be used in the support calculation 21 commencing 7/1/2026. Father asks that the Court keep the imputed $100,000 salary through 22 3/31/2026 for purposes of the “future true-up.” Father estimates that Mother is currently earning 23 $550,000. Father states that after the last support hearing on March 17th during which Mother 24 claimed financial hardship, Mother provided Father with her proposed vacation schedule, which 25 included international travel with the kids for ~12 days over Father’s day and a second week-long 26 domestic trip later this summer.

Father notes that it is not clear how the parties are to perform the 27 yearly support true-up given that the temporary restraining order limits Father’s communication 28 with Mother to just communications regarding exchanges. Father requests that the Court appoint 29 a third-party accountant to manage the yearly true-up. Father also states that Mother “provides

1 little or no information regarding add-on expenses” and wants the Court to provide explicit rules 2 for add-on expenses. Father further states that Mother sends support checks at various times each 3 month, backdates checks to the 1st of the month, but mails the check as much as 7 or more days 4 later; Father requests the Court “set a postmark date each month for payment consistency.” Father 5 also discusses several custody and visitation issues in his declaration, and requests that the Court 6 order the children to be removed from Lycee France De San Francisco and attend public school 7 through San Francisco Unified School District. 8 9) On 6/24/2026, Mother requested to continue the originally scheduled 6/30/2026 review hearing 9 because Mother needed additional time to prepare complete and accurate financial statements. 10 10) On 6/26/2026, the Court granted Mother’s request to continue the 6/30/2026 hearing to 9/1/2026. 11 11) On 8/13/2026, Mother filed an Update Declaration.

Mother states that the current support 12 calculation was based on an estimate of projected monthly income which did not come to fruition. 13 Mother states that in 2025, rather than earning $25,000 in monthly net self-employment income, 14 she actually earned average net monthly income of $15,380, resulting her paying support based 15 on income substantially greater than she actually earned. For 2026, Mother estimates that her net 16 self-employment income will average in the rage of $3,500 to $8,000 per month.

Mother requests 17 that the Court use $3,500 per month for net self-employment income when calculating support 18 with any additional income to be accounted for in an annual true-up. Mother also asks the Court 19 to impute $155,000 per year in annual salary to Father. Mother states, “Since forming my practice 20 in 2022, my business deductions have been limited to ordinary and necessary expenses required 21 to operate the medical practice, maintain legal and licensing compliance, and provide patient care. 22 Deducted expenses are as itemized in schedule C of my business tax returns and in professionally 23 prepared annual profit and loss statements with one exception: depreciation, amortization, 50% of 24 meal expenses, and California franchise taxes are added back to income and not deducted as 25 business expenses for purposes of calculating income available for support.”

Mother states, “I am 26 not voluntarily unemployed, underemployed, or working below my professional qualifications. I 27 continue to work to increase the practice's patient volume, revenue, and profitability.” Mother 28 states that the decision to transition from her previous lucrative position as a full-time surgeon 29 was a joint decision made with Father which coincided with the decision to have a second child.

1 The goal was to transition to “a practice combining surgery with more flexible general 2 dermatology so that I could meet our children's daily needs while David pursued his demanding 3 finance career. We agreed that private practice would provide the flexibility and autonomy 4 necessary to accomplish this.” Mother also states, “My historical gross business profit over the 5 preceding three years is as follows: $1,236,886 in 2023, $1,405,392 in 2024, and $1,116,442 in 6 2025. My historical wage income is as follows: $177,504 in 2023, $140,709 in 2024 and 7 $151,950 in 2025.

My historical self-employment income is: $147,158 in 2023, $145,449 in 8 2024, and $15,267 in 2025. The sharp decline in self-employment income in 2025 is attributed to 9 a lower gross business profit for the year, and higher business overhead (for example markedly 10 increased costs of goods due to Trump tariffs, worsening inflation, direct purchase of capital 11 expenditure necessary to run the business, repayment of business loans etc).” Mother states 12 Father remains underemployed. Mother states, “From January 2021 and at the time of marital 13 separation in January 2024, David was an associate research equity analyst at Wedbush earning 14 between $139,000- $166,000 as an unlicensed broker.

Because he completed his required 15 brokerage licensure requirements in December 2023 (see publicly available FINRA broker 16 license search) his bonus earnings would have been expected to increase in July 2024. Per 17 financial markets data on compensation in the US, fully licensed mid-level or associate equity 18 research analysts, which is David’s most recent role, earned between $190,000 and $400,000 in 19 San Francisco in 2023 and 2024 (Exhibit C). But David did not remain with Wedbush long 20 enough to see any such increases in bonus.

He was let go from this position in May 2024.” 21 Mother states that Father’s work search efforts have been minimal. Mother states Mother has not 22 contacted Garth Timoll, who is a CEO of a top venture capital firm, who previously assisted 23 Father to find employment in 2021, nor has he contacted Matthew Barcus, Vice President of 24 Equity Research in Biotech at Jeffries, regarding open equity research positions. Mother states 25 Father continues to direct his work efforts towards speculative or unpaid ventures that he 26 eventually abandons.

Mother states, “Our children should not have to lose their school, 27 established activities, childcare, friendships, family travel, or experience housing instability 28 because David remains underemployed despite his demonstrated ability and opportunity to earn 29 substantially more. It is in their best interests that both parents contribute according to their

1 earning capacities rather than require the children to bear the consequences of David’s decision to 2 devote substantial working capacity to ventures producing little or no income instead of 3 compensated employment consistent with his qualifications and earning capacity.” 4 12) On 8/13/2026, Mother filed an Income and Expense Declaration. 5 13) On 8/13/2026, Mother filed a Statement of Support Calculation. Mother’s proposed support 6 calculation calls for Mother to pay Father $1 in base child support and $0 in base temporary 7 spousal support. 8 14) The Court notes the following future hearing dates: 9 a. 10/1/2026 – hearing on Mother’s Request for Order filed 6/30/2026 seeking sole legal 10 and physical custody of the children, and reduced timeshare for Father.

The Court notes 11 this would be a change to the current orders which provide for joint legal and joint 12 physical custody of the children and for a 2-2-5-5 parenting schedule. 13 b. 10/21/2026 – second long-cause hearing date on Mother’s Order to Show Cause re: 14 Contempt filed 10/17/2025 wherein Mother alleges Father violated the First Amended 15 Temporary Restraining Order. 16 15) The Court also notes that on 2/19/2026, Judge Chan concluded a 5-day trial on Mother’s Request 17 for Domestic Violence Restraining Order filed 6/4/2025.

The parties agreed to continue the trial 18 for a period of one year, which included extending the Temporary Restraining Order for one year. 19 The parties also agreed that if there were no acts violating the Temporary Restraining Order for a 20 period of one year, Mother’s Request for Domestic Violence Restraining Order would be 21 dismissed. The Temporary Restraining Order (filed 3/9/2026) is currently set to expire on 22 2/23/2027. 23 B. Findings and Order 24 1) There are two issues on for this review hearing: (a) whether to modify child and temporary 25 spousal support retroactive to the date Father began his new job to take into account (i) Father’s 26 new employment earnings and (ii) possibly lowered base income and self-employment income 27 for Mother; and (b) whether the Temporary Restraining Order filed 3/9/2026 should be modified 28 to permit channels of communication between the parties regarding legal issues (e.g., how the 29 parties can communicate to calculate support true-ups).

1 2) Base Child and Temporary Spousal Support 2 a. The Court finds good cause to modify child and temporary spousal support retroactive to 3 7/1/2026, which is when Father expects he will begin earning more income through 4 David Carlson Consulting LLC. The Court finds that Father’s new employment as well as 5 Mother’s decreased earnings warrant a modification of child and temporary spousal 6 support. 7 b. The Court does not find good cause to impute additional income to Father beyond the 8 $102,000 in annual income that Father anticipates he will be earning with his new 9 positions of employment and self-employment.

This finding is made without prejudice to 10 the Court’s ability to impute additional income to Father when the Court adjudicates 11 long-term spousal support. If the Court finds good cause to impute additional income to 12 Father when it adjudicates long-term spousal support, the Court may also modify child 13 support to impute additional income to Father. 14 c. The Court also does not find good cause to impute to Mother more income than what she 15 currently reports earning. This finding is made without prejudice to the Court’s ability to 16 impute additional income to Mother when the Court adjudicates long-term spousal 17 support.

If the Court finds good cause to impute additional income to Mother when it 18 adjudicates long-term spousal support, the Court may also modify child support to impute 19 additional income to Mother. 20 d. Effective 7/1/2026, in accordance with the XSpouse report attached hereto and 21 incorporated by reference, Mother shall pay Father base child support of $876 per month 22 and base temporary spousal support of $474 per month, for total base support of $1,350 23 per month. This amount shall be paid to Father in full no later than the 5 th of each month. 24 Mother’s support checks shall be mailed to Father and post-dated no later than the 2nd of 25 each month. 26 e.

The Court will use the following inputs in the XSpouse calculation: 27 i. Father estimates that he will be earning $102,000 annually going forward, which 28 averages out to $8,500 per month. 29

1 ii. The Court is using the income inputs for Mother provided by Mother in her 2 proposed XSpouse calculation, but is not including mandatory retirement, as the 3 Court does not see evidence that Mother is required to contribute to a retirement 4 plan. 5 3) Child Support Add-Ons 6 a. The XSpouse calculation shows that, after payment of base child support and temporary 7 spousal support, the parties’ net spendable incomes are essentially equalized. 8 b. Effective July 1, 2026, the parties shall share equally all reasonable uninsured healthcare 9 costs of the children as well as the costs for the children to participate in any 10 extracurricular activity in which they are currently enrolled or in which the parties 11 mutually agree in writing the children can be enrolled. 12 c.

The procedure for requesting and paying reimbursement claims for uninsured healthcare 13 costs shall be as set forth in Judicial Council Form FL-192. 14 d. The procedure for requesting and paying reimbursements for qualifying extracurricular 15 activity costs shall be as follows. When a party (e.g. Party A) pays for a qualifying 16 extracurricular activity cost, within 30 days of paying the expense, Party A shall present 17 to Party B: (a) an itemized statement of charges, (b) proof of payment, and (c) the amount 18 due and owing from Party B.

Within 10 days of receiving this information, Party B shall 19 submit a payment to Party A for Party B’s share of the expense. 20 e. At each annual true-up, the parties shall recalculate their respective net spendable 21 incomes after payment of base child support and temporary spousal support and shall 22 recalculate each party’s share of reasonable uninsured healthcare costs for the children 23 based on the parties’ respective net spendable incomes after payment of support. Any 24 resulting reimbursement or credit shall be included in the true-up. 25 4) Support Arrears or Credits Due for the Period 7/1/2026 – 8/31/2026 26 a.

Any support arrears or credits due for the period 7/1/2026 – 8/31/2026 and any 27 reimbursements due for child support add-ons for that same period as a result of the 28 modification of child and temporary spousal support orders set forth above shall be 29 discussed and accounted for during the support true-up for 2026.

1 5) Annual True-Up of Support 2 a. The parties shall perform an annual true-up of support. During the true-ups, the parties 3 shall recalculate child and spousal support based on the parties’ total income earned 4 during the previous year, calculate any support arrears or credits owed, and calculate any 5 additional child support add-on reimbursements owed for reasonable uninsured 6 healthcare expenses and extracurricular activity costs based on the parties’ net spendable 7 incomes for support based on each party’s annual income. 8 b.

No later than February 28th of each year, both parties shall provide to the other party 9 documentation showing total W2 income earned during the immediately preceding year 10 as well as Profit and Loss Statements for the immediately preceding year showing net 11 self-employment income. 12 c. When calculating net self-employment income, the parties shall add back in depreciation, 13 amortization, 50% of meal expenses, and California franchise taxes. 14 d. When recalculating child and spousal support for the immediately preceding year, the 15 income inputs used in the XSpouse calculation attached hereto and incorporated herein 16 set a floor in terms of the parties’ incomes.

In other words, the true-up is only meant to 17 capture support owed for income earned in addition to the income figures used for each 18 party in the XSpouse calculation. 19 e. Any child support arrears or credits owed as a result of the true-up shall be paid no later 20 than March 31st. 21 6) Other Orders 22 a. The Work Search Order remains in full force and effect. 23 b. Regarding Father’s request that the children attend public school this year, the Court 24 finds that issue is not currently before the Court.

Either party may file a new Request for 25 Order to address this issue. 26 7) The Court will prepare the Findings and Order After Hearing. 27

carlson v. carlson xspouse.xsp Xspouse 2026-1-CA

Fixed Shares Father Mother Monthly figures Cash Flow #of children 2 0 2026 Guideline Proposed % time with NCP 0.00 % 49.99 % Comb. net spendable 17237 17237 Filing status HH/MLA HH/MLA GUIDELINE Percent change 0% 0% # exemptions 2 2 Nets(adjusted) Father Wages+salary 8500 11916 Father 6695 Payment cost/benefit 1350 1350 Self-employed income 0 3084 Mother 10542 Net spendable income 8045 8045 Other taxable income 0 1399 Total 17237 Change from guideline 0 0 TANF+CS received 0 0 Support Other nontaxble income 0 0 Addons % of combined spendable 47% 47% 0 New spouse income 0 0 Guideln CS % of saving over guideline 0% 0% 876 401(k) employee contrib 0 0 Total taxes 1805 1805 S.Clara SS 474 Adjustments to income 0 0 Dep. exemption value 0 0 Total 1350 SS paid prev marriage 0 0 # withholding allowances 0 0 - CS paid prev marriage 0 0 Net wage paycheck 6476 6476 Health insurance 0 1875 Mother Other medical expense 0 0 Payment cost/benefit -1350 -1350 Property tax expense 0 0 Net spendable income 9192 9192 Ded interest expense 0 0 Proposed Change from guideline 0 0 Charitable contributions 0 0 Tactic 9 % of combined spendable 53% 53% Misc tax deductions 0 0 CS 876 Qual bus income ded 0 0 SS % of saving over guideline 0% 0% 474 Required union dues 0 0 Total Total taxes 3982 3982 1350 Mandatory retirement 0 0 Dep. exemption value 0 0 Hardship deduction 0 * 0 * Saving 0 # withholding allowances 0w 0w Other GDL deductions 0 0 Releases 0 Net wage paycheck 8459 8459 Child care expenses 0 0

Mother pays Guideline CS, Guideline SS, Proposed CS, Proposed SS

FC 4055 checking: ON Per Child Information Timeshare cce(F) cce(M) Addons Payor Basic CS Payor Pres CS Payor All children 50 - 50 0 0 0 Father 876 Mother 876 Mother

50 - 50 0 0 0 Father 329 Mother 329 Mother 50 - 50 0 0 0 Father 548 Mother 548 Mother

Time: 12:35:36 Superior Court of California Date: 08/31/26 County of San Francisco