Child Support Enforcement - Sarpy County Nebraska
Child Support Enforcement - Sarpy County Nebraska
Child Support Enforcement - Sarpy County Nebraska
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
and that the child's best interests are served by his or her continued removal<br />
from parental custody.<br />
In determining whether parental rights should be terminated based on<br />
abandonment, paternal uncertainty based on physical appearance of a child or<br />
suspicions of infidelity is not just cause or excuse for abandoning a child born into<br />
wedlock, especially when there are ample means to verify one's paternity.<br />
For purposes of § 43-292(1), " abandonment" is a parent's intentionally<br />
withholding from a child, without just cause or excuse, the parent's presence,<br />
care, love, protection, maintenance, and the opportunity for the display of<br />
parental affection for the child.<br />
Jorn v. Pigs Unlimited, Inc., 255 Neb. 876, 587 N.W.2d 558 (1998).<br />
The term ―impairment‖ is a medical assessment, while the term ―disability‖ is a<br />
legal issue.<br />
Moore v. Bauer, 11 Neb. App. 572, 657 N.W.2d 25 (2003)<br />
It is not unusual for a parent or parents to have continuing financial obligations<br />
regarding their children beyond the age of majority. There is no authority,<br />
statutory or otherwise, that requires a court to consider these types of expenses<br />
in determining the child support obligation for the remaining minor child or<br />
children.<br />
Phillips v. Industrial Machine, 257 Neb. 256, 278, 597 N.W.2d 377, 392 (1999)<br />
Permanent medical impairment is related directly to the health status of the<br />
individual, whereas disability can be determined only within the context of the<br />
personal, social, or occupational demands, or statutory or regulatory<br />
requirements that the individual is unable to meet as a result of the impairment.<br />
(Gerrard, J., concurring).<br />
Reed v. Reed, 277 Neb. 391, 763 N.W.2d 686 (2009)<br />
[A] child support creditor may use the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act (UFTA)<br />
to pursue transferred assets that are needed to satisfy a child support award.<br />
(see also Parker v. Parker, 268 Neb. 187, 681 N.W.2d 735 (2004))<br />
An action under the UFTA is equitable in nature, and all persons whose rights will<br />
be directly affected by a decree in equity must be joined as parties in order that<br />
complete justice may be done and that there may be a final determination of the<br />
rights of all parties interested in the subject matter of the controversy<br />
It has been held that if an action is brought for wrongful transfer and it is possible<br />
to fashion relief which does not adversely affect the transferee‘s interest, then the<br />
transferee may not need to be joined in an action for judgment of damages<br />
against a defendant.<br />
―[d]issipation of marital assets‖ is defined as one spouse‘s use of marital property<br />
for a selfish purpose unrelated to the marriage at the time when the marriage is<br />
undergoing an irretrievable breakdown.<br />
Ropken v. Ropken, 169 Neb. 352, 99 N.W.2d 480 (1959)<br />
<strong>Nebraska</strong> will recognize common law marriages entered into consistent with the law of<br />
the state the parties resided in when such marriage is deemed to have begun.<br />
- 185 -