due to an individual, regardless of source, including wages, salaries, commissions, bonuses, workers’ compensation, disability, payments pursuant to a pension or retirement program, and interest.” (Emphasis added.) The definition of income under Order No. 10 is intentionally broad and is designed to encompass the widest range of sources consistent with this State’s policy to broadly interpret income for the benefit of the child. See Ford v. Ford, 347 Ark. 485, 65 S.W.3d 432 (2002). Sums paid due to money judgments are considered income for child-support purposes. See Evans v. Tillery, 361 Ark. 63, 204 S.W.3d 547 (2005) (awarding child support based on money judgments received in a malicious prosecution suit and assault suit); Stuart v. Stuart, 99 Ark. App. 358, 260 S.W.3d. 740 (2007) (<HOLDING>). Given these authorities, the circuit court
holding in part that a change in the mothers income that occurred after the trial was new evidence and that when a party has new evidence related to his or her income he or she may be entitled to a modification of a childsupport obligation if he or she files a petition to modify however because the mother had filed a postjudgment motion rather than a petition to modify her childsupport obligation her request to modify child support was not properly before the trial court holding that a tuition waiver is not the same as income for child support purposes holding that under uifsa alabama courts may modify an alabama childsupport order only if the obligor the obligee or the concerned child affected by that order reside in the state and all the parties who are individuals have not filed written consent for the tribunal of another state to exercise jurisdiction over the childsupport order holding that personal injury settlement proceeds are disposable income to the extent that they are not reasonably necessary for the support of the debtors holding that proceeds from a classaction medicalmalpractice suit when received would constitute income for childsupport purposes