Child Support Enforcement - Sarpy County Nebraska

Temporary orders in the district court allowing alimony, child support, or the
custody of minor children terminate with the rendition of a final decree of divorce.
Spady v. Spady, 284 Neb. 885 (December 2012)
Section 42-351 provides:
(1) In proceedings under sections 42-347 to 42-381, the court shall have jurisdiction to
inquire into such matters, make such investigations, and render such judgments and make
such orders, both temporary and final, as are appropriate concerning the status of the
marriage, the custody and support of minor children, the support of either party, the
settlement of the property rights of the parties, and the award of costs and attorney’s fees.
The court shall determine jurisdiction for child custody proceedings under the Uniform Child
Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act.
(2) When final orders relating to proceedings governed by sections 42-347 to 42-381 are on
appeal and such appeal is pending, the court that issued such orders shall retain jurisdiction to
provide for such orders regarding support, custody, parenting time, visitation, or other access,
orders shown to be necessary to allow the use of property or to prevent the irreparable harm
to or loss of property during the pendency of such appeal, or other appropriate orders in aid
of the appeal process. Such orders shall not be construed to prejudice any party on appeal.
The word “support” in § 42-351(2) is not by its terms limited to child support. Further,
we look to the immediately preceding provision, § 42-351(1), which refers to “support
of minor children [and] the support of either party.” Section 42-351(1) shows that the
word “support” is used statutorily in § 42-351 to refer to child support and spousal
support, i.e., alimony.
State v. Biernacki, 237 Neb. 215, 217, 465 N.W.2d 732, 734 (1991)
The failure of a party to submit a brief which complies with [its] rules may result in
our treating the case as one in which no brief has been filed by that party. Review
would thus be limited to “plain error” consideration.
State ex rel. Lemon v. Gale, 272 Neb. 295, 721 N.W.2d 347 (2006)
In order to be considered by an appellate court, an alleged error must be both
specifically assigned and specifically argued in the brief of the party asserting the
error.
J & H Swine v. Hartington Concrete*, 12 Neb. App. 885, 687 N.W.2d 9 (2004)
Rule: Timing is everything. This case, if anything, may teach the necessity for patience.
For an appellate court to acquire jurisdiction of an appeal, there must be a final
order entered by the court from which the appeal is taken; conversely, an appellate
court is without jurisdiction to entertain appeals from nonfinal orders.
- 11 -