Can a North Carolina Judge Base Alimony on Last Year’s Paycheck?

Has your income changed since your divorce case began? Many parents involved in an alimony case may see a new job or pay cut occur after a case begins and worry that a judge will simply pull from the number that looks worst from an old tax document.

A published North Carolina Court of Appeals decision shows precisely when that may be allowed and when it isn’t.

In Theuerkorn v. Heller, No. COA24-715 (N.C. Ct. App. June 18, 2025), the court reviewed a Catawba County divorce case that started with a strange clerical mistake. The case ended up testing how closely a support order must match exactly how much a spouse is earning at the time of the case.

Note: This is a published opinion, meaning it carries full precedential weight and North Carolina trial courts must follow it — not just consider it as helpful guidance.

What are the Details of Theuerkorn v. Heller?

Thomas Theuerkorn and Melissa Beth Heller were married in 2011 and separated in 2022. The couple had three children at the time of their separation.

At trial, the judge ordered Theuerkorn to pay Heller a $132,840.26 distributive award as well as 48 months of alimony. However, the judge left the amount due for the alimony payments blank.

Heller moved under Rule 60(a) to have the omission fixed. The judge then granted it and filled in the blank with alimony payments of $1,250 a month. Theuerkorn then appealed both orders.

The Issue: Filling In a Blank Isn’t the Same as Rewriting the Order

In his appeals, Theuerkorn argued that the trial court used Rule 60 to “sneak in” a substantial change disguised as a correction. However, the Court of Appeals disagreed.

The court found that both orders already obligated Theuerkorn to pay alimony, so filling in the dollar figure in the blank didn’t change the obligation’s source. Instead, it was simply a clerical fix, a similar distinction we’ve covered in another case about amending a judgment under Rule 60.

The Property Division Held Up

The court also affirmed the judge’s initial $132,840.26 distributive award. Theuerkorn had argued that the trial court never found that he had liquid assets to pay the award.

However, the trial court didn’t need to determine that he had the assets. He’d been awarded half of an $890,000 retirement account, as well as half of a $202,000 pension and a marital home with over $96,000 in equity.

As we’ve written before, a distributive award only has to be backed by resources the record can show, not necessarily cash in hand.

The Real Problem: Whose Income Did the Court Use?

If you’re going through a divorce yourself, this is one of the most useful parts of this case and outcome: the trial court’s finding on Theuerkorn’s income ($20,728.31 gross per month), looked like a current-earnings finding.

But it wasn’t. That amount was his 2023 W-2 total divided by twelve months. At the hearing in February 2024, Theuerkorn testified that his real pay was down to ~$3,134 a month, which was far lower than his 2023 average and the $15,298 on his own financial affidavit.

North Carolina law allows a court to rely on a prior year’s income, but only after the court finds that the current income isn’t deemed credible. In Theuerkorn v. Heller, the trial court skipped that finding and never addressed either spouse’s expenses or their standard of living. Both of those numbers are required for an alimony award.

Because of those gaps, the Court of Appeals vacated alimony and child support and sent the case back for the missing findings.

This is a similar situation to one that occurred earlier this year in Sunshine v. Sunshine, when a trial court adjusted a spouse’s income without making the finding that North Carolina law requires. The principle we’ve seen often holds true in this case as well: a court must explain, in writing, what income it’s using in its decision and why. They can’t simply do the math on whichever pay stub or tax return is easiest to find and pull from.

What Theuerkorn v. Heller Means if You’re Facing Alimony or Child Support in North Carolina

While the specifics may be different from your situation, there are many takeaways that can help you understand your rights under NC law:

• Your alimony order must reflect what you’re earning right now, not an average from an old tax return. The only exception is if the court finds your current numbers not credible.
• Bring all recent pay stubs and a financial affidavit to every support hearing. Don’t rely on last year’s W-2 – you want the most current number on record.
• Your expenses are important as well. In Theuerkorn v. Heller, the court skipped required findings on both spouses’ expenses and standard of living. That’s a gap worth watching for in your own order.
• A blank line that’s filled in later isn’t grounds for appeal in most cases. However, a missing income finding can be.

If what counts as income under North Carolina law has left you wondering if your own child support numbers reflect what you’re currently earning, you’re asking the right question. It’s similar to the same question that sent Theuerkorn v. Heller back to the trial court.

Want to Learn More? Woodruff Family Law Group is Here to Help

If you’re heading into an alimony hearing or already have an order built on income that doesn’t quite match what you’re currently earning, knowing how the court reached its number matters.

Woodruff Family Law Group can help. Our Greensboro family law team can review your case and help ensure your order accurately reflects the numbers that North Carolina law requires. Contact Woodruff Family Law Group today to schedule a consultation.