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.

obligation, should generally apply also when the request is to terminate a child<br />

support obligation.<br />

Metcalf v. Metcalf, 278 Neb. 258, 769 N.W.2d 386 (2009)<br />

Second attempts to modify support just got harder to justify under this Supreme Court<br />

decision<br />

We determine that in cases where there has been a previous attempt to modify<br />

support, the court must first consider whether circumstances have changed since<br />

the most recent [albeit failed] request for modification. But when considering<br />

whether there has been a material and substantial change in circumstances<br />

justifying modification, the court will consider the change in circumstances since the<br />

date of the last order establishing or modifying alimony. In other words, a judgment<br />

for alimony may be modified only upon a showing of facts or circumstances<br />

that have changed since the last order granting or denying modification was<br />

entered. But once some change has been established since the last request,<br />

the analysis focuses on the change in circumstances since alimony was<br />

originally awarded or last modified. We adopt this rule because it recognizes the<br />

force of res judicata; modification will be considered only when there has been a<br />

change in circumstances since the last request for modification. But if there has<br />

been no change, modification is not justified, because the request is essentially the<br />

same as the last request.<br />

[A]ny change in circumstances occurring since the first [unsuccessful] modification<br />

proceeding should have been compared to the original decree when determining<br />

whether the change in circumstances was a material and substantial change<br />

warranting modification. Any changes in … circumstances that occurred prior to the<br />

first modification proceeding are settled, and the doctrine of res judicata prevents the<br />

district court from considering any change based on those circumstances.<br />

Muller v. Muller, 3 Neb. App. 159, 524 N.W.2d 78 (1994)<br />

Knaub v. Knaub, 245 Neb. 172, 512 N.W.2d 124 (1994)<br />

Modification of the amount of child support payments is an issue entrusted to the<br />

discretion of the trial court, and although, on appeal, the issue is reviewed de novo<br />

on the record, the decision of the trial court will be affirmed absent an abuse of<br />

discretion.<br />

A party seeking to modify child support must show a material change in<br />

circumstances which has occurred subsequent to the entry of the original order or<br />

previous modification and was not contemplated when the most recent support<br />

order was entered.<br />

Among the factors to be considered in determining whether a material change in<br />

circumstances has occurred are changes in the financial position of the obligor<br />

parent, the needs of the children, good or bad faith motive of the obligor parent in<br />

sustaining a reduction in income, and whether the change is temporary or<br />

permanent.<br />

The paramount concern and question in determining child support is the best<br />

interests of the child.<br />

Murphy v. Murphy, 17 Neb. App. 279 (2008)<br />

Facts: Father was employed for $70,000 a year at time of divorce. He was also on<br />

disciplinary probation and “skating on thin ice” at that time. Within a year he got into more<br />

- 126 -

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!