Child Support Enforcement - Sarpy County Nebraska

Drew on Behalf of Reed v. Reed, 16 Neb. App. 905, 755 N.W.2d 420 (2008)
See § 4-212 of the Child Support Guidelines
Joint physical custody means the child lives day in and day out with both parents on
a rotating basis.
Numerous parenting times with a child do not constitute joint physical custody.
Liberal parenting time does not justify a joint custody child support calculation.
Eliker v. Eliker, 206 Neb. 764, 295 N.W.2d 268 (1980).
Time may heal all wounds, but it does not make child support go away.
Questions of custody and support are not controllable by agreement of the parties.
Neither of the parties is authorized to interfere with the court's orders and only the court
can determine what, if any, adjustments should be made.
Elsome v. Elsome, 257 Neb. 889, 601 N.W.2d 537 (1999)
If trial evidence establishes a joint physical custody arrangement, courts will so
construe it, regardless of how prior decrees or court orders have characterized the
arrangement.
When the parent owing child support has physical custody of the minor children at
least 38% of the time, the parties have joint physical custody, and the joint
physical custody worksheet (worksheet 3) should be used in setting child support.
See § 4-212 of the Child Support Guidelines
Farnsworth v. Farnsworth, 276 Neb. 653, 756 N.W.2d 522 (2008)
In re Interest of Eric O. & Shane O., 9 Neb. App. 676, 617 N.W.2d 824 (2000)
[But also see Cesar C. v. Alicia L., 281 Neb. 979, ___ N.W.2d ____ (July 2011) for a
limitation on this doctrine]
“Parental Preference Doctrine and Fitness or Forfeiture”
The father‘s natural right to the custody of his children trumps the interest of a
grandparent to the parent-child relationship and the preferences of the child. This is
true even when the father has been previously absent from the child‘s life and owes
thousands of dollars in back child support, and even when the child had been living
with the maternal grandparents and the child‘s mother, prior to the mother‘s death.
Nebraska law creates a presumption in favor of child custody with a
biological parent as against an unrelated third party.
Although the question present in every child custody case is the best interests of the
child, a court cannot overlook or disregard that the best interests standard is subject
to the overriding recognition that the relationship between parent and child is
constitutionally protected.
The courts may not properly deprive a parent of the custody of a minor child unless it
is affirmatively shown that such parent is unfit to perform the duties imposed by
the relationship or has forfeited that right.
The U.S. Supreme Court has held that due process of law requires a parent to be
granted a hearing on his or her fitness as a parent before being deprived of custody.
And the right of a parent to the care, custody, and management of his or her children
is considered one of the most basic rights of man.
Parental preference means that absent unfitness or forfeiture, the natural parent
prevails against an unrelated person in a custody dispute. … While appellate courts
have often spoken of a natural parent‘s superior rights as against those of an
- 45 -