Child Support Enforcement - Sarpy County Nebraska

[T]he fact that [the custodial parent] did not respond to [the non custodial parent]’s
motion for modification of their divorce decree is not determinative of the status of
the tax exemptions. [The noncustodial parent] may not be granted the exemptions
simply on [the custodial parent’s] failure to respond or appear. Rather, this court,
under its equity powers, balances the interests of the parties and then determines
where the equities lie.
Hartman v. Hartman, 265 Neb. 515, 657 N.W.2d 646 (2003)
The decision to vacate an order any time during the term in which the judgment is
rendered is within the discretion of the court; such a decision will be reversed only if
it is shown that the district court abused its discretion. … [A] district court has
equitable power to vacate a judgment during the term in which it was entered on
grounds which include, but are not limited to, those enumerated in §25-2001(4).
[A] decision to vacate an order within the same term is within the discretion of the
court, the decision will be reversed only if it is shown that the district court abused its
discretion. … An abuse of discretion occurs when the trial court’s decision is based
upon reasons that are untenable or unreasonable or if its action is clearly against
justice or conscience, reason, and evidence.
Note: Terms of the various district courts may be found by accessing their respective rules
on the Supreme Court’s web site.
Henderson v. Henderson, 264 Neb. 916, 653 N.W.2d 226 (2002)
A noncustodial parent is entitled to credit against a monthly child support obligation
for Social Security benefits paid to his or her minor child as a result of the
noncustodial parent’s post divorce disability.
The credit is an equitable credit, which in no way modifies the underlying obligation
to pay for the support of the dependents. See Gress v. Gress, 257 Neb. 112, 596
N.W.2d 8 (Gress I)
Social Security disability insurance program benefits are not means-tested public
assistance benefits, but are based on prior earnings of the recipient, not on the
financial need of the recipient.
Henke v. Guerrero, 13 Neb. App. 337, 692 N.W.2d 762 (2005)
While a paternity action is one at law, the award of child support in such an action
is equitable in nature. “Child support is equitable relief.”
A trial court’s award of child support in a paternity case will not be disturbed on
appeal in the absence of an abuse of discretion by the trial court.
Jameson v. Jameson, 13 Neb. App. 703, 700 N.W.2d 638 (2005)
Facts: For several years, Father voluntarily increased the amount of child support he paid
through the child support payment office, resulting in a $19,000 overpayment according to the
records of the clerk of district court. Mother sought erasure of credit, claiming that
overpayments were not an accident but represented voluntary payments by father. (Parents
had agreed informally that support should be increased, but did not seek judicial ratification of
their informal agreement)
Held: Credit is erased, and Father cannot apply overpayments to offset his later
underpayments of support.
Whether overpayments of child support should be credited retroactively against child
support payments in arrears is a question of law. See Palagi v. Palagi, 10 Neb.
App. 231, 627 N.W.2d 765 (2001).
- 69 -