Pamela L. Jacobson-Kaplan v. Adam J. Kaplan

**Employment Income and Family Court Decisions** This case involved a divorced couple, Pamela Jacobson-Kaplan and Adam Kaplan, who disagreed about income calculations during their divorce proceedings. The dispute centered on how much income should be attributed to each spouse for determining spousal and child support payments. Employment income was a key issue because courts needed to determine each person's actual earning capacity. The appeals court made a split decision. They agreed with the lower court's ruling that Pamela should be considered capable of earning a certain level of income (called "imputing income"), even if she wasn't currently earning that amount. However, they found that the trial court had incorrectly calculated Adam's income, which affected the spousal and child support awards. As a result, those support payments had to be recalculated. **What This Means for Workers:** This case shows that courts can consider your earning potential, not just your current income, in legal proceedings. Even if you're unemployed or underemployed, a court might determine you're capable of earning more based on your education, work history, and job market conditions. This principle can affect divorce settlements, child support, and other situations where income matters.