Child Support Enforcement - Sarpy County Nebraska

the purpose of that litigation, all matters ruled upon, either expressly or by
necessary implication.
Medlock v. Medlock, 263 Neb. 666, 642 N.W.2d 113 (2002)
A party cannot complain of error which that party has invited the court to commit.
A party cannot ask a court to use income averaging for a certain number of years
in modifying support, then object to the court when it averages income for a
different set of years. See Willcock v. Willcock, 12 Neb. App. 422 (2004)
Schroeder v. Schroeder, 223 Neb. 684, 392 N.W.2d 787 (1986)
A plaintiff may enter a dismissal as a matter of right at any time before final
submission of a case.
Temporary orders perish at the moment the Plaintiff‘s suit ceases to exist.
Smith v. Smith, 201 Neb. 21, 265 N.W.2d 855 (1978)
1. Courts: Divorce: Infants: Child Support. Where a divorce decree provides for the
payment of stipulated sums monthly for the support of a minor child or children,
contingent only upon a subsequent order of the court, such payments become
vested in the payee as they accrue. The courts are without authority to reduce
the amounts of such accrued payments.
2. Equity: Time. Where the obligation is clear and its essential character has not
been changed by lapse of time, equity will enforce a claim of long standing as
readily as one of recent origin, especially between the immediate parties to the
litigation.
3. Equity: Laches. The defense of laches prevails only when it has become
inequitable to enforce the claimant‘s right, and it is not available to one who has
caused or contributed to the cause of delay or to one who has had it within his
power to terminate the action.
4. Courts: Child Support: Estoppel. This court does not have authority to reduce
past-due installments of child support. This is not to say, however, that it may not
find in a proper case that a party has equitably estopped herself from collecting
installments accruing after some affirmative action which would ordinarily
terminate future installments.
5. Estoppel: Equity: Public Policy. Equitable estoppel is based upon grounds of
public policy and good faith and is interposed to prevent injustice and inequitable
consequences. Ordinarily, there must be a reliance in good faith upon statements
or conduct of the party to be estopped and a change of position by the party
claiming the estoppel to his injury, detriment, or prejudice.
Thornton v. Thornton, 13 Neb. App. 912, 704 N.W.2d 243 (2005)
Service of Process: Notice. Pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. §25-517.02 (Reissue
1995), upon motion and showing by affidavit that service cannot be made with
reasonable diligence by any other method provided by statute, the court may
permit service to be made (1) by leaving the process at the defendant‘s usual
place of residence and mailing a copy by first-class mail to the defendant‘s lastknown
address, (2) by publication, or (3) by any manner reasonably calculated
under the circumstances to provide the party with actual notice of the
proceedings and an opportunity to be heard.
- 183 -