Child Support Enforcement - Sarpy County Nebraska

More documents

Recommendations

Info

$F:\Kevin\2007 Case Lists\Currently on web page\District Judges ...$



$\\orion\ChildSupport\Kevin\2007 Case Lists\Currently on web page ...$

appropriate worksheets with its order and provide in its order the amount of support that would have been required under the guidelines absent a deviation. We further emphasize the importance of providing the methods used when calculating a deviation by showing this either on the worksheets or in the order. Henke v. Guerrero, 13 Neb. App. 337, 692 N.W.2d 762 (2005) This case is a great example of how courts struggle to sort through issues relating to children of second families. In this case, the child for whom support was ordered is one of the custodial parent’s children. The child was born during the marriage of the CP, but is not the husband’s child. Likewise, the obligated parent was married to someone else, and has other children, born both before and after the child at issue. Although this is not a multiple-family case based on a remarriage, it is about as complex a multifamily situation as we can imagine. Moore v. Bauer, 11 Neb. App. 572, 657 N.W.2d 25 (2003) Under certain circumstances, it may be appropriate for a trial court to consider subsequently born children of a party when determining child support. This determination is entrusted to the discretion of the trial court. The party requesting a deviation from the Nebraska Child Support Guidelines based upon an obligation to support offspring of a subsequent relationship bears the burden of providing evidence regarding the obligation, including the income of the other parent of the child or children of the subsequent relationship. The party requesting a deviation from the Nebraska Child Support Guidelines based upon an obligation to support offspring of a subsequent relationship bears the burden of providing evidence regarding the obligation, including the income of the other parent of the child or children of the subsequent relationship. Prochaska v. Prochaska, 6 Neb. App. 302, 573 N.W.2d 777 (1998) In Lodden v. Lodden, 243 Neb. 14, 497 N.W.2d 59 (1993), the Supreme Court found no abuse of discretion in the trial court’s failure to consider a father’s obligation to support his present family and in the increase of the father’s support obligation to his previous family. The court stated that the guidelines “do not provide for an automatic deduction for the support of children of subsequent marriages.” (But see dissent in Lodden) State on Behalf of J. R. v. Mendoza, 240 Neb. 149, 481 N.W.2d 165 (1992) (Discussed in more detail elsewhere in this outline) Step parent must legally support minor child living in his/her home. Obligation ends when child emancipates, or when stepparent becomes divorced from parent of child. See Neb. Rev. Stat. §28-705(1) Weinand v. Weinand, 260 Neb. 146, 616 N.W.2d 1 (2000) Question Presented: Must an ex-stepparent who is awarded rights of reasonable visitation in a divorce decree pay child support as a consequence of such an award? [P]arties in a proceeding to dissolve a marriage cannot control the disposition of matters pertaining to minor children by agreement. The Nebraska divorce statutes do not impose a duty upon any individual other than a parent to pay for the support of minor children. We…hold that in circumstances where a minor child is living with, and being supported by, both of his or her natural parents, the statutory responsibility for the child’s support is solely that of the natural parents. § 42-364(6). - 164 -
In order to stand in loco parentis, one must assume all obligations incident to the parental relationship. …No matter how well intentioned, an ex-stepfather who visits his former stepdaughter on Tuesday and Thursday afternoons and on every other Sunday, cannot, by definition, be deemed as standing in loco parentis. Service of Process & Related 25-217. Action; commencement; defendant not served; effect. An action is commenced on the date the complaint is filed with the court. The action shall stand dismissed without prejudice as to any defendant not served within six months from the date the complaint was filed. Source: Laws 2002, LB 876, § 5. § 25-505.01 Service of summons; methods; State Court Administrator; maintain list. (1) Unless otherwise limited by statute or by the court, a plaintiff may elect to have service made by any of the following methods: (a) Personal service which shall be made by leaving the summons with the individual to be served; with some person of suitable age and discretion residing therein; (b) Residence service which shall be made by leaving the summons at the usual place of residence of the individual to be served, with some person of suitable age and discretion residing therein; (c) Certified mail service which shall be made by (i) within ten days of issuance, sending the summons to the defendant by certified mail with a return receipt requested showing to whom and where delivered and the date of delivery, and (ii) filing with the court proof of service with the signed receipt attached; or (d) Designated delivery service which shall be made by (i) within ten days of issuance, sending the summons by a designated delivery service to the defendant, (ii) obtaining a signed delivery receipt showing to whom and where delivered and the date of delivery, and (iii) filing with the court proof of service with a copy of the signed delivery receipt attached. As used in this subdivision, a designated delivery service means a delivery service designated as such pursuant to 26 U.S.C. 7502(f) and a signed delivery receipt includes an electronic or facsimile receipt with an image of the recipient’s signature. (2) Failure to make service by the method elected by the plaintiff does not affect the validity of the service. (3) The State Court Administrator shall maintain on the web site of the Supreme Court a list of designated delivery services. Source: Laws 1983, LB 447, § 22; Laws 1984, LB 845, § 21; Laws 2009, LB35, § 6; Laws 2011, LB669, § 7. Operative Date: May 27, 2011 See www.irs.gov/publications/p80/ar01.html (www.supremecourt.ne.gov/community/index.shtml) DHL Express (DHL): DHL Same Day Service. Federal Express (FedEx): FedEx Priority Overnight, FedEx Standard Overnight, FedEx 2Day, FedEx International Priority, and FedEx International First. United Parcel Service (UPS): UPS Next Day Air, UPS Next Day Air Saver, UPS 2nd Day Air, UPS 2nd Day Air A.M., UPS Worldwide Express Plus, and UPS Worldwide Express. Your private delivery service can tell you how to get written proof of the mailing date. Private delivery services cannot deliver items to P.O. boxes. You must use the U.S. Postal Service to mail any item to an IRS P.O. box address. - 165 -
Page 1 and 2:
Have a Wonderful Summer! Child Supp
Page 3 and 4:
Table of Contents:* * (accessible v
Page 5 and 6:
Table of Contents (continued): Mult
Page 7 and 8:
A Note for Legal Practitioners: Mem
Page 9 and 10:
Overview/ IV-D Attorney Duty Gangwi
Page 11 and 12:
Neb. Rev. Stat. § 7-105(2) (Reissu
Page 13 and 14:
See Lehr v. Robertson, 463 U.S. 248
Page 15 and 16:
their attorney of record and, excep
Page 17 and 18:
State ex rel. Lemon v. Gale, 272 Ne
Page 19 and 20:
disobedience as an essential elemen
Page 21 and 22:
student loan that the noncustodial
Page 23 and 24:
having jurisdiction to compel the s
Page 25 and 26:
Drew on Behalf of Reed v. Reed, 16
Page 27 and 28:
income, is to be considered in dete
Page 29 and 30:
§ 48-802 - Statutes, General Rules
Page 31 and 32:
from arriving on the scene, either
Page 33 and 34:
In equity cases trial judges should
Page 35 and 36:
Similarly, a party who does more th
Page 37 and 38:
Common Law Marriages States that au
Page 39 and 40:
Constitutional Issues/ Statutory In
Page 41 and 42:
Little v. Streater, 452 U.S. 1, 101
Page 43 and 44:
In re Interest of Thomas M., 282 Ne
Page 45 and 46:
See Smeal Fire Apparatus Co. v. Kre
Page 47 and 48:
Because a conditional commitment is
Page 49 and 50:
obligation when he currently has an
Page 51 and 52:
An order modifying child custody wh
Page 53 and 54:
Haynes v. Haynes, 205 Neb. 35, 286
Page 55 and 56:
Stuhr v. Stuhr, 240 Neb. 239, 481 N
Page 57 and 58:
By failing to take the genetic test
Page 59 and 60:
State on behalf of L.L.B. v. Hill,
Page 61 and 62:
Due Process Conn v. Conn, 13 Neb. A
Page 63 and 64:
or court order of emancipation or a
Page 65 and 66:
Henderson v. Henderson, 264 Neb. 91
Page 67 and 68:
they have income. There is no floor
Page 69 and 70:
Lainson v. Lainson, 219 Neb. 170, 3
Page 71 and 72:
Millatmal v. Millatmal, 272 Neb. 45
Page 73 and 74:
24A Am. Jur. 2d Divorce and Separat
Page 75 and 76:
[T]he fact that [the custodial pare
Page 77 and 78:
The same principles that apply with
Page 79 and 80:
“[C]oncerns regarding the stigma
Page 81 and 82:
(a) The interpretation of the suppo
Page 83 and 84:
make the appointment. In other case
Page 85 and 86:
Guidelines Issues (Including suffic
Page 87 and 88:
Note: In July 2008 the Federal Chil
Page 89 and 90:
Erica J. v. Dewitt, 265 Neb. 728, 6
Page 91 and 92:
Morrill County v. Darsaklis, 7 Neb.
Page 93 and 94:
Any deviation from the guidelines m
Page 95 and 96:
to also pay reimbursement for reaso
Page 97 and 98:
or law of another state substantial
Page 99 and 100:
§43-1711 Income, defined. Income s
Page 101 and 102:
Simpson v. Simpson, 275 Neb. 152, 7
Page 103 and 104:
§42-364.09. Child support; withhol
Page 105 and 106:
§43-1709. Employer or other payor,
Page 107 and 108:
(6) That the employer or other payo
Page 109 and 110:
income withholding for current supp
Page 111 and 112:
Title IV-D Division of the Departme
Page 113 and 114:
Held: The state was acting beyond i
Page 115 and 116:
(3) Any juvenile…whose parent, gu
Page 117 and 118:
proceeding or a new action. Since t
Page 119 and 120: State, Dept. of Social Services v.
Page 121 and 122: amount equal to the support due and
Page 123 and 124: Source: Laws 1975, LB 212, § 8; La
Page 125 and 126: The second is used in aid of an exe
Page 127 and 128: Halsted v. Halsted, 169 Neb. 325, 9
Page 129 and 130: Neb. Ct. R. § 4-217 Modification.
Page 131 and 132: she had sufficient resources to pro
Page 133 and 134: If applicable, earning capacity may
Page 135 and 136: Gress v. Gress, 274 Neb. 686, 743 N
Page 137 and 138: A district court may modify a regis
Page 139 and 140: Peter v. Peter, 262 Neb. 1017, 637
Page 141 and 142: See also: Wilkins v. Wilkins, 269 N
Page 143 and 144: Under certain circumstances, an ame
Page 145 and 146: A party seeking to modify a dissolu
Page 147 and 148: (2)The department, through its agen
Page 149 and 150: § 43-1408.01 Notarized acknowledgm
Page 151 and 152: §43-1414. Genetic testing; procedu
Page 153 and 154: Carlson v. Bartels, 143 Neb. 680, 1
Page 155 and 156: as to the paternity of the minor ch
Page 157 and 158: Jones v. Paulson, 261 Neb. 327, 622
Page 159 and 160: in loco parentis to the child. See,
Page 161 and 162: (b) If the court orders income with
Page 163 and 164: enforcement, for example, we are fo
Page 165 and 166: ights of visitation. Later mother c
Page 167 and 168: Matchett v. Dunkle, 244 Neb. 639, 5
Page 169: Connecticut, the District of Columb
Page 173 and 174: Of particular interest is the requi
Page 175 and 176: Social Security (Also see Equity, E
Page 177 and 178: Calculate support this way: 1. Mom
Page 179 and 180: Spousal support, when used in the c
Page 181 and 182: punishment for sexual assault in th
Page 183 and 184: Hall v. Hall, 238 Neb. 686, 472 N.W
Page 185 and 186: interests of a child are served by
Page 187 and 188: §42-722. Private counsel. An indiv
Page 189 and 190: the following three conditions are
Page 191 and 192: Source: Laws 1993, LB 500, § 43 §
Page 193 and 194: Despite a basic difference in the n
Page 195 and 196: Conrad v. Conrad, 208 Neb. 588, 304
Page 197 and 198: Mace v. Mace, 13 Neb. App. 896, 703
Page 199 and 200: In re Interest of Chance J., 279 Ne
Page 201 and 202: per hour, two hour minimum. C. (1)
Page 203 and 204: (3) If, regardless of whether payme
Page 205 and 206: Rule 21 adopted April 16, 2008. Ren
Page 207 and 208: Nebraska Information System (NIS):
Page 209 and 210: web site: www.usmc-mccs.org/contact
Page 211 and 212: FIPS FPLS IRG IV-D JUSTICE MSFIDM N
show all

Child Support Enforcement - Sarpy County Nebraska

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?