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

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Peterson v. Peterson, 224 Neb. 557, 399 N.W.2d 792 (1987)<br />

The district court may maintain legal custody of minor children, while awarding<br />

physical custody to a parent or other party.<br />

Raney v. Blecha, 258 Neb. 731, 605 N.W.2d 449 (2000)<br />

Grandparents’ existing visitation rights are not automatically terminated by an<br />

adoption, but can be modified upon a showing of cause with the child’s best interests<br />

at issue.<br />

State on behalf of Combs v. O’Neal, 11 Neb. App. 890, 662 N.W.2d 231 (2003)<br />

The “parental preference doctrine” holds that in a child custody controversy<br />

between a biological parent and one who is neither a biological nor an adoptive<br />

parent, the biological parent has a superior right to custody of the child. In re<br />

Stephanie H. et al., 10 Neb. App. 908, 639 N.W.2d 668 (2002), citing In re Interest<br />

of Amber G. et al., 250 Neb. 973, 554 N.W.2d 142 (1996).<br />

A court may not properly deprive a biological or adoptive parent of the custody of the<br />

minor child unless it is affirmatively shown that such parent is unfit to perform the<br />

duties imposed by the relationship or has forfeited that right<br />

Parental forfeiture means that parental rights “‘may be forfeited by substantial,<br />

continuous, and repeated neglect of a child and a failure to discharge the duties of<br />

parental care and protection.’” In re Interest of Eric O. & Shane O., 9 Neb. App.<br />

676, 685, 617 N.W.2d 824, 832 (2000).<br />

The <strong>Nebraska</strong> Supreme Court has stated that a person standing in loco parentis to a<br />

child is one who has put himself or herself in the situation of a lawful parent by<br />

assuming the obligations incident to the parental relationship, without going through<br />

the formalities necessary to a legal adoption, and the rights, duties, and liabilities of<br />

such person are the same as those of the lawful parent. In re Interest of Destiny<br />

S., 263 Neb. 255, 639 N.W.2d 400 (2002), citing Weinand v. Weinand, 260 Neb.<br />

146, 616 N.W.2d 1 (2000).<br />

State o/b/o Pathammavong v. Pathammavong, 268 Neb. 1, 679 N.W.2d 749 (2004)<br />

While an unwed mother is initially entitled to automatic custody of the child, the issue<br />

must ultimately be resolved on the basis of the fitness of the parents and the best<br />

interests of the child.<br />

Stuhr v. Stuhr, 240 Neb. 239, 481 N.W.2d 212 (1992)<br />

In the absence of a contrary statutory provision, in a child custody controversy<br />

between a biological or adoptive parent and one who is neither biological nor an<br />

adoptive parent of the child involved in the controversy, a fit biological or adoptive<br />

parent has a superior right to custody of the child.<br />

Watson v. Watson, 272 Neb. 647, 724 N.W.2d 24 (2006)<br />

This case reviews the UCCJEA and addresses when courts can, and cannot transfer issues<br />

of child custody and visitation to courts in other states. Generally, as long as one parent resides<br />

in <strong>Nebraska</strong> and maintains a relationship with the minor child, <strong>Nebraska</strong> courts maintain<br />

exclusive jurisdiction over the issues of custody and visitation, regardless of where the child<br />

lives. This is regardless of what courts in other states purport to do.<br />

- 50 -

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!