Child Support Enforcement - Sarpy County Nebraska

Inequity may result if the court adopts a policy of less than full enforcement of
mutually agreed-upon property and support agreements.
[P]ublic policy forbids enforcement of a private agreement that purports to discharge
a parent’s liability for child support, if the agreement does not adequately provide for
the child. But the agreement at issue here did not discharge (the father’s) liability for
child support. Instead, it expressly provided (the father) with credit for a payment
that the parties agreed would constitute prepayment of any subsequent child support
award. We conclude that on the facts of this case, the agreement is enforceable.
Simons v. Simons, 261 Neb. 570, 624 N.W.2d 36 (2001)
Obligated parent’s release from prison is not an unknowable or uncertain future
event. Only the date of release was unknown. Conditioning future child support
order upon his release from prison does not constitute a conditional judgment.
Distinguish from:
Harvey v. Harvey, 14 Neb. App. 380, 707 N.W.2d 444 (2005)
Court in dissolution proceeding ordered the sale of the marital home, if certain conditions
were not met regarding refinancing within a set time period.
In Nebraska, a judgment is the final determination of the rights of the parties in an
action. Neb. Rev. Stat. §25-1301(1) (Cum. Supp. 2004). However, if a judgment
looks to the future in an attempt to judge the unknown, it is a conditional judgment. A
conditional judgment is wholly void because it does not “perform in praesenti” and
leaves to speculation and conjecture what its final effect may be.
Vogel v. Vogel, 262 Neb. 1030, 637 N.W.2d 611 (2002)
Facts: Court ordered differing visitation schedules, depending upon whether the father was
transferred overseas, or if the parents moved close to one another. Mother appealed.
Held: such alternative visitation schedules constitute conditional orders.
If a judgment looks to the future in an attempt to judge the unknown, it is a
conditional judgment. A conditional judgment is wholly void because it does not
“perform in praesenti” and leaves to speculation and conjecture what its final effect
may be. Such orders become effective only upon the happening of certain future
events which may or may not occur. Whether such orders will ever become effective
is speculative.
Constitutional Issues/ Statutory Interpretation
(See also Criminal Non-Support)
Allen v. Sheriff of Lancaster Cty., 245 Neb. 149, 511 N.W.2d 125 (1994).
An indigent litigant had a right to appointed counsel in a contempt action for failure to
pay a debt assigned to him in a dissolution decree, where he was jailed for
contempt.
- 33 -