Child Support Enforcement - Sarpy County Nebraska

Accurate decisionmaking as to the “ability to pay”—which marks a dividing line
between civil and criminal contempt—must be assured because an incorrect
decision can result in a wrongful incarceration.
An available set of “substitute procedural safeguards,” if employed together, can
significantly reduce the risk of an erroneous deprivation of liberty. These include (1)
notice to the defendant that his “ability to pay” is a critical issue in the contempt
proceeding; (2) the use of a form (or the equivalent) to elicit relevant financial
information from him; (3) an opportunity at the hearing for him to respond to
statements and questions about his financial status; and (4) an express finding by
the court that the defendant has the ability to pay.
This decision does not address civil contempt proceedings where the underlying
support payment is owed to the State, e.g., for reimbursement of welfare funds paid
to the custodial parent, or the question what due process requires in an unusually
complex case where a defendant “can fairly be represented only by a trained
advocate. The average defendant does not have the professional legal skill to
protect himself when brought before a tribunal with power to take his life or liberty,
wherein the prosecution is presented by experienced and learned counsel.
Carroll v. Moore, 228 Neb. 561, 423 N.W.2d 757 (1988)
Persons accused of paternity have the right to court appointed counsel if found
to be indigent. This is true in non state assistance cases as well as state aid cases.
A determination of paternity in a state-initiated paternity suit is res judicata, and
therefore not open to attack in a later proceeding involving collateral issues such as
nonpayment of support.
Cammarata v. Chambers, 6 Neb. App. 467, 574 N.W.2d 530 (1998)
A child support order may consist merely of an order for “no support.” Even if
a court order provides that no support is due from either parent, that does not
change the fact that there is an existing support order.
County Attorney may not in such cases seek to obtain a support order for custodial
parent under provisions of §43-512.03 (authorizing county attorney intervention to
establish an order for child support where no order presently exists.)
Freis v. Harvey, 5 Neb. App. 679, 563 N.W.2d 363 (1997)
Child support judgments are not rendered dormant by the passage of time.
Kiplinger v. Nebraska Dept. of Nat. Resources, 282 Neb. 237, 803 N.W.2d 28 (Sept.
2011)
A statute is presumed to be constitutional, and all reasonable doubts are resolved in
favor of its constitutionality. The burden of establishing the unconstitutionality of a
statute is on the one attacking its validity.
The unconstitutionality of a statute must be clearly established before it will be
declared void.
Kropf v. Kropf, 248 Neb. 614, 538 N.W.2d 496 (1995)
§§ 42-358 and 43-512.03I do not grant the district court the authority to appoint the
county attorney to pursue support obligation arrearage where the decree, order, or
judgment does not provide for child support.
- 34 -