23.06.2014 Views

Child Support Enforcement - Sarpy County Nebraska

Child Support Enforcement - Sarpy County Nebraska

Child Support Enforcement - Sarpy County Nebraska

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

appellate court tries factual questions de novo on the record and reaches a<br />

conclusion independent of the findings of the trial court.<br />

[T]he district court abused its discretion in quashing the subpoena [duces tecum,<br />

seeking NCP‘s recent tax returns, life insurance info, home appraisal info and<br />

related documents as to his earning capacity]. The fact in issue is whether the<br />

subordination requested would unduly reduce the security regarding the remaining<br />

amount of approximately $182,000 in child support and alimony. Clearly, the items<br />

requested by [the mother] were relevant to a determination of [the NCP‘s] financial<br />

status and whether the child support and alimony liens should be subordinated in<br />

order to allow Michael to refinance his real estate.<br />

NCP has the burden to demonstrate that the release or subordination is not<br />

requested for the purpose of avoiding payment and that the release or subordination<br />

will not unduly reduce the security. The failure to produce an appraised value of the<br />

real estate and the failure to produce evidence of income tax returns and projected<br />

income tax returns leaves the court without any reasonable basis for determining<br />

whether to subordinate the child support and alimony liens. Since [the NCP] is<br />

asking for equitable relief, it is his obligation to produce the information which will<br />

support such relief. We therefore conclude that the district court erred in<br />

subordinating the liens without first having sufficient information before it.<br />

Halsted v. Halsted, 169 Neb. 325, 99 N.W.2d 384 (1959)<br />

Parker v. Parker, 10 Neb. App. 658, 636 N.W.2d 385 (2001)<br />

A judgment lien does not attach to mere legal title where equitable and beneficial<br />

interests are in another. A judgment lien is a lien only on the actual interest of the<br />

judgment debtor, and a judgment lien is subject to all existing equities, whether of<br />

record or not.<br />

A lien for unpaid child support comes into existence only upon service of the<br />

summons of the action seeking unpaid child support. Also see Nowka v. Nowka,<br />

157 Neb. 57, 58 N.W.2d 600 (1953)<br />

State v. Merrill, 273 Neb. 583, 731 N.W.2d 570 (2007)<br />

Facts: Merrill was charged with several felony charges, including child abuse. His grandfather<br />

posted his $5,000 criminal appearance bond, then Merrill assigned the right to get the bond<br />

back to his grandfather. Meantime, the State filed an “Affidavit of Lien for <strong>Child</strong> <strong>Support</strong>” in<br />

the criminal case. Later, Merrill was sentenced to imprisonment on the felony charges, and his<br />

grandfather sought to have the bond money back. The clerk of district court refused, due to the<br />

state’s lien. Merrill appealed. The district court heard and considered the matter as part of the<br />

criminal case, and ordered the bond receipts returned to the grandfather. The state appealed.<br />

We conclude that the State was not authorized to appeal the (district court‘s) order<br />

in this criminal case and that therefore, this court lacks jurisdiction over this appeal.<br />

Absent specific statutory authorization, the State, as a general rule, has no right to<br />

appeal an adverse ruling in a criminal case.<br />

- 115 -

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!