Child Support Enforcement - Sarpy County Nebraska

More documents

Recommendations

Info

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



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

[P]aragraph O of the child support guidelines, regarding health insurance, is subject to paragraph R [now § 4-218] of the guidelines, the basic subsistence limitation guideline. Kearney v. Kearney, 11 Neb. App. 88, 644 N.W.2d 171 (2002). In other words, if making the parent pay part of uncovered medical expenses would cause them to fall below the federal poverty guidelines, then the court cannot make them pay a portion of uncovered medical expenses. Rutherford v. Rutherford, 277 Neb. 301, 761 N.W.2d 922 (2009) The guidelines provided that a parent who requests an adjustment in child support for health insurance premiums “must submit proof of the cost of the premium.” State on Behalf of Martinez v. Martinez-Ibarra, 281 Neb. 547, 797 N.W.2d 222 (May 2011) The child support guidelines do not allow for a deduction on Worksheet #1 for cash medical support. The requirement that the custodial parent pay the first $480 of nonreimbursed medical expenses per year does not serve to reduce the amount of cash medical support ordered. Ward v. Ward, 7 Neb. App. 821, 585 N.W.2d 551 (1998) Pursuant to subsection (2) of this section, in a divorce case, a judge may not order both parties to provide health insurance for the child or children, but must direct which party shall provide such insurance. Incarceration Up until 2008 the law in <strong>Nebraska</strong> absolutely prohibited an incarcerated prisoner from returning to court to seek a reduction in his or her ongoing monthly child support obligation due solely to the fact that the obligated parent was incarcerated and unable to work as they did prior to their incarceration. The case law below reflects this long legacy of refusing to award people for their own bad behavior. However, recently the legislature has amended <strong>Nebraska</strong> law to allow for parents who are incarcerated for long periods of time to successfully seek downward modification in their child support orders. This represents a true sea change in the way this issue will be addressed by our courts. It is crucial to note that IV-D attorneys shall not in any way assist in these attempts to reduce child support. The changes are set forth in § 43-512.15: § 43-512.15 Title IV-D child support order; modification; when; procedures. (1) The county attorney or authorized attorney, upon referral from the Department of Health and Human Services, shall file a complaint to modify a child support order unless the attorney determines in the exercise of independent professional judgment that: (a) The variation from the Supreme Court child support guidelines pursuant to section 42-364.16 is based on material misrepresentation of fact concerning any financial information submitted to the attorney; (b) The variation from the guidelines is due to a voluntary reduction in net monthly income. For purposes of this section, a person who has been incarcerated for a period of one year or more in a county or city jail or a federal or state correctional facility shall be considered to have an involuntary reduction of income unless (i) the incarceration is a result of a conviction for criminal nonsupport pursuant to section 28-706 or a conviction for a violation of any federal law - 90 -
or law of another state substantially similar to section 28-706 or (ii) the incarcerated individual has a documented record of willfully failing or neglecting to provide proper support which he or she knew or reasonably should have known he or she was legally obligated to provide when he or she had sufficient resources to provide such support, or (iii) the incarceration is a result of a conviction for a crime in which the child who is the subject of the child support order was victimized;…. . . (2) The department, a county attorney, or an authorized attorney shall not in any case be responsible for reviewing or filing an application to modify child support for individuals incarcerated as described in subdivision (1)(b) of this section. Practice Note: §42-358 (3) indicates that where the child support payment history shows that the obligated parent is in arrears, a prima facie case of contempt is made. Arguendo that should be all that is needed to shift the burden to the incarcerated parent to disprove that he or she was acting willfully or neglectfully with regard to their child support obligation at the time they walked (shackled) into prison. (Hat tip to Tyler Jacobsen in the Lancaster Co. Attorney’s office) Legacy Cases(?). Their relevance post 2007 is in doubt. State o/b/o Longnecker v. Longnecker, 11 Neb. App. 773, 660 N.W.2d 544 (2003) In considering a petition for the modification of child support, a different test is applied if an individual is incarcerated when an initial determination of child support is made versus when a modification of child support is sought. A petition for the modification of child support will be denied if a change in financial condition is due to fault or voluntary wastage or dissipation of one’s talents and assets. Ohler v. Ohler, 220 Neb. 272, 369 N.W.2d 615 (1985) Incarceration is not a material change of circumstances warranting suspension of child support obligation Incarceration is certainly a foreseeable result of criminal activity; we find no sound reason to relieve one of a child support obligation by virtue of the fact that he or she engaged in criminal conduct. Newer Case Law re. Incarceration and Modification Hopkins v. Stauffer, 18 Neb. App. 116, 775 N.W.2d 457 (2009) Facts: Proving he is a failure at everything, Father tries unsuccessfully to murder his wife, is arrested, tried, convicted and sentenced to 20-40 years incarceration. Obviously he wants his child support reduced. Under the new legislation he succeeds! A split opinion of the Court of Appeals. They immediately all went home and took showers. We conclude that the Legislature intended for an incarcerated inmate to be able to file his or her own complaint to modify child support and for the incarceration to be considered an involuntary reduction of income when the conditions of § 43-512.15 (1)(b) are met. We cannot ignore the evident intent of the legislative act merely because the Legislature could have chosen a better section in which to codify its amendment. Having settled the meaning of the statute, an appellate court must give effect to the purpose and intent of the Legislature. A change in law, rather than the actions of the parties, may itself constitute a material change in circumstances such to justify a modification of child support. - 91 -
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: to also pay reimbursement for reaso
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 and 170:
Connecticut, the District of Columb
Page 171 and 172:
In order to stand in loco parentis,
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?