Child Support Enforcement - Sarpy County Nebraska

Emery v. Moffett, 269 Neb. 867, 697 N.W.2d 249 (2005);
Hall v. Hall, 238 Neb. 686, 472 N.W.2d 217 (1991).
A tax dependency exemption is nearly identical in nature to an award of child
support or alimony.
The general rule is that a custodial parent is presumptively entitled to the federal tax
exemption for a dependent child.
Gress v. Gress, 274 Neb. 686, 743 N.W.2d 67 (2007)
Issue: How many years back should a court go in averaging income of parents with fluctuating
income.
As a general matter, in the determination of child support, income from a selfemployed
individual is determined by looking to that person‘s tax returns.
(Reviewing) a 3-year average (income) tends to be the most common approach in
cases where a parent‘s income tends to fluctuate. It is not necessary for a court to
look back more than three years.
A daycare obligation is also subject to paragraph R's basic subsistence
limitation.
Henderson v. Henderson, 264 Neb. 916, 653 N.W.2d 226 (2002)
A district court has no authority to include a child who is more than 19 years of age
in its child support calculations.
Henke v. Guerrero, 13 Neb. App. 337, 692 N.W.2d 762 (2005)
An award of child support is equitable in nature. A trial court‘s award of child support
in a paternity case will not be disturbed on appeal in the absence of an abuse of
discretion by the trial court. Also see Weaver v. Compton, 8 Neb. App. 961, 605
N.W.2d 478 (2000)
Child support in a paternity action is to be determined in the same manner as in
cases of children born in lawful wedlock. See Neb. Rev. Stat. §43-1402 (Reissue
2004). The resulting duty of a parent to provide such support may, under
appropriate circumstances, require the award of retroactive child support. State
o/b/o Joseph F. v. Rial, 251 Neb. 1, 554 N.W.2d 769 (1996)
The requirement of support begins at the time of the birth of the child, whether the
child is born in lawful wedlock or otherwise.
Clearly, retroactive support is included in the ―support‖ that the trial court may order
under §43-1412 (3).
Hildebrand v. Hildebrand, 239 Neb. 605, 477 N.W.2d 1 (1991)
In case this point wasn’t self evident….
Citing In re Marriage of Root, 774 S.W.2d 521 (Mo. App. 1989):
It would be absurd to hold that once parents remarry each other and the
family is again intact and residing in the same household, the former
noncustodial parent must pay future installments of child support to the
other parent per the past divorce decree. That is to say, the remarriage
should terminate the former noncustodial parent's duty to pay any child
support that would have become due after the remarriage.
[O]nce parties remarry, the former child support order is moot, while any
deficiencies prior to the marriage are collectible.
- 19 -