04.04.2014 Views

Child Support Enforcement - Sarpy County Nebraska

Child Support Enforcement - Sarpy County Nebraska

Child Support Enforcement - Sarpy County Nebraska

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

or a previous modification and was not contemplated when the prior order was<br />

entered.<br />

Incontro v. Jacobs, 277 Neb. 275, 761 N.W.2d 551 (2009)<br />

<strong>Child</strong> support orders are always subject to review and modification.<br />

A decree awarding child support will not be modified because of a change of<br />

circumstances which was in the contemplation of the parties at the time the original<br />

or preceding order was made, but only those anticipated changes which were<br />

specifically noted on the record at the time the previous order was entered will<br />

prevent modification.<br />

The party seeking the modification has the burden to produce sufficient proof that a<br />

material change of circumstances has occurred that warrants a modification.<br />

Courts may consider various factors to determine whether a material change of<br />

circumstances has occurred. Among the factors to be considered are (1) changes in<br />

the financial position of the parent obligated to pay support, (2) the needs of the<br />

children for whom support is paid, (3) good or bad faith motive of the obligated<br />

parent in sustaining a reduction in income, and (4) whether the change is temporary<br />

or permanent.<br />

The paramount concern in child support cases, whether in the original proceeding or<br />

subsequent modification, remains the best interests of the child.<br />

If applicable, earning capacity may be considered in lieu of a parent’s actual,<br />

present income and may include factors such as work history, education,<br />

occupational skills, and job opportunities. Earning capacity is not limited to wageearning<br />

capacity, but includes moneys available from all sources.<br />

If it is shown that a reduction in the obligor parent’s income is attributable to his or<br />

her personal wishes and not the result of unfavorable or adverse conditions in the<br />

economy, his or her health, or other circumstances affecting his or her earning<br />

capacity, then a reduction in child support is not warranted.<br />

Jameson v. Jameson, 13 Neb. App. 703, 700 N.W.2d 638 (2005)<br />

A good example of how not to get your child support case modified, even when the<br />

custodial parent agrees with you that it should be reduced.<br />

Obligor was unemployed through apparently no fault of his own. Obligee agreed to<br />

a reduction in support, however there was no evidence by either party regarding<br />

what obligor’s earning capacity was at the time of the hearing or whether his earning<br />

capacity has changed since the 1995 modification order. So Application to Modify<br />

was denied.<br />

Lamb v. Lamb, 14 Neb. App. 337, 707 N.W.2d 423 (2005)<br />

The modification of another state’s child support order must be addressed under the<br />

Uniform Interstate Family <strong>Support</strong> Act, Neb. Rev. Stat. §§42-701 to 42-751<br />

(Reissue 2004).<br />

Upon petition, a tribunal of this state may modify a child support order issued in<br />

another state which is registered in this state if, after notice and hearing, the<br />

tribunal finds that (1) neither the child nor the individual obligee nor the obligor<br />

resides in the issuing state, a petitioner who is a nonresident of <strong>Nebraska</strong> seeks<br />

modification, and the respondent is subject to the personal jurisdiction of the<br />

<strong>Nebraska</strong> district court or (2) <strong>Nebraska</strong> is the state of residence of the child, or a<br />

party who is an individual is subject to the personal jurisdiction of the <strong>Nebraska</strong><br />

- 133 -

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!