Child Support Enforcement - Sarpy County Nebraska

More documents

Recommendations

Info

$F:\Kevin\2007 Case Lists\Currently on web page\District Judges ...$



$\\orion\ChildSupport\Kevin\2007 Case Lists\Currently on web page ...$

Fredericks v. Western Livestock Auction Co., 225 Neb. 211, 403 N.W.2d 377 (1987) A “ default judgment will not ordinarily be set aside on the application of a party who, by his own fault, negligence, or want of diligence, has failed to protect his own interests. . . .’” Joyce v. Joyce, 229 Neb. 831, 834, 429 N.W.2d 355 (1988) This court held in Tejral v. Tejral, 220 Neb. 264, 267, 369 N.W.2d 359, 361 (1985) that “where a party in a dissolution of marriage case is served personally with a summons and a copy of the petition in the case, and that party chooses not to file any pleading nor to enter an appearance in the case, and has not otherwise requested notice of hearing, notice of default hearing need not be given to such party. We further hold that it is an abuse of the trial court’s discretion under § 42- 372 to set aside a dissolution decree, properly entered, on the sole basis that notice of hearing was not sent to the party in default of filing any pleading or entering an appearance in the case.” The same rule is applicable in a URESA [Revised Uniform Reciprocal Enforcement of Support Act] case. The same rule is also applicable in this case. Appellant failed to file an appearance or a pleading in this case. Local court rules do not supersede the common law of this state. Notice of the default hearing was not required, and therefore appellant’s third assignment of error is without merit.” Starr v. King, at 342. State on behalf of A.E. vs. Buckhalter, 273 Neb. 443, 730 N.W.2d 340 (2007) [A] party who is served with summons and a copy of the complaint and fails to answer or make an appearance in a case is not entitled to further notice of a hearing. “A party’s voluntary inaction and inattention should not be permitted to paralyze the ordinary and orderly functioning of the legal process.” Citing Tejral v. Tejral, 220 Neb. 264, 369 N.W.2d 359 (1985). [W]hen the court has entered a default judgment and the defendant has made a prompt application at the same term to set it aside, with the tender of an answer or other proof disclosing a meritorious defense, the court should on reasonable terms sustain the motion and permit the cause to be heard on the merits. A meritorious or substantial defense or cause means one which is worthy of judicial inquiry because it raises a question of law deserving some investigation and discussion or a real controversy as to the essential facts.12 To vacate the default judgment, Buckhalter is not required to show that he will ultimately prevail, but only that he has a recognized defense that is not frivolous. By failing to take the genetic testing ordered by the court, Buckhalter passed up the opportunity to present a meritorious defense. Buckhalter argues that the employment verification forms the State introduced to show Buckhalter’s income were inadequate. Buckhalter contends that the State should have requested his tax returns through discovery instead of relying on the employment verification forms as evidence of his income. … We believe the State used a reasonable method to obtain information about Buckhalter’s income when he refused to participate in the proceedings or submit evidence in his own behalf. The court did not err in calculating its child support award on employment - 52 -
verification forms instead of tax returns or wage stubs. Steinberg v. Stahlnecker, 200 Neb. 466, 468, 263 N.W.2d 861, 863 (1978) Where a judgment has been entered by default and a prompt application has been made at the same term to set it aside, with the tender of an answer or other proof disclosing a meritorious defense, the court should on reasonable terms sustain the motion and permit the cause to be heard on the merits. A party seeking to vacate a default judgment must tender an answer or other proof disclosing a meritorious defense (as a condition of having the default judgment vacated). Talkington v. Womens Servs., 256 Neb. 2, 588 N.W.2d 790 (1999) A district court has the inherent authority to vacate or modify its decision within the same term in which the initial decision was rendered. Discovery See Nebraska Rules for Discovery, in PDF or HTML formats. Disestablishment and related (See also Paternity) The Unicameral upended the legal apple cart on this issue in 2008, by passage of LB 1014 (Section 47). The bill is codified at § 43-1412.01: § 43-1412.01. Legal determination of paternity set aside; when; guardian ad litem; court orders. An individual may file a complaint for relief and the court may set aside a final judgment, court order, administrative order, obligation to pay child support, or any other legal determination of paternity if a scientifically reliable genetic test performed in accordance with sections 43-1401 to 43-1418 establishes the exclusion of the individual named as a father in the legal determination. The court shall appoint a guardian ad litem to represent the interest of the child. The filing party shall pay the costs of such test. A court that sets aside a determination of paternity in accordance with this section shall order completion of a new birth record and may order any other appropriate relief, including setting aside an obligation to pay child support. No support order may be retroactively modified, but may be modified with respect to any period during which there is a pending complaint for relief from a determination of paternity under this section, but only from the date that notice of the complaint was served on the nonfiling party. A court shall not grant relief from determination of paternity if the individual named as father (1) completed a notarized acknowledgment of paternity pursuant to section 43-1408.01, (2) adopted the child, or (3) knew that the child was conceived through artificial insemination. Source: Laws 2008, LB1014, § 47. It remains to be seen how courts and litigants will apply this statute. The language is permissive: Courts MAY set aside paternity judgments if the legal father steps through all the - 53 -
Page 1 and 2:
The Unicameral remains in session u
Page 3 and 4:
Table of Contents:* * (accessible v
Page 5 and 6:
Table of Contents (continued): Mili
Page 7 and 8: A Note for Legal Practitioners: Mem
Page 9 and 10: Secondly, I have taken the approach
Page 11 and 12: sections, the county attorney or au
Page 13 and 14: final court-ordered determination t
Page 15 and 16: clerk of the district court in whic
Page 17 and 18: (1) In proceedings under sections 4
Page 19 and 20: Nebraska courts, through their inhe
Page 21 and 22: place. This recommendation recogniz
Page 23 and 24: (4) Orders, decrees, and judgments
Page 25 and 26: Mother apparently consents to this
Page 27 and 28: Johnson v. Johnson, 215 Neb. 689, 3
Page 29 and 30: stand dismissed without prejudice a
Page 31 and 32: This case includes an excellent sum
Page 33 and 34: Koch v. Koch, 226 Neb. 305, 312, 41
Page 35 and 36: We conclude that the state was not
Page 37 and 38: Modifying the amounts awarded to a
Page 39 and 40: [P]ublic policy forbids enforcement
Page 41 and 42: Carroll v. Moore, 228 Neb. 561, 423
Page 43 and 44: (3) … A rebuttable presumption of
Page 45 and 46: Lenz v. Lenz, 222 Neb. 85, 382 N.W.
Page 47 and 48: Finally, we conclude that for futur
Page 49 and 50: (7) Criminal nonsupport is a Class
Page 51 and 52: A mother’s testimony that one is
Page 53 and 54: Neither of the parties is authorize
Page 55 and 56: In guardianship termination proceed
Page 57: Weinand v. Weinand, 260 Neb. 146, 6
Page 61 and 62: State v. Cummings, 2 Neb. App. 820,
Page 63 and 64: Where parents of the child are sepa
Page 65 and 66: any unpaid child support obligation
Page 67 and 68: Henderson v. Henderson, 264 Neb. 91
Page 69 and 70: (0,1,2,or 3+) and how much “earne
Page 71 and 72: Earning capacity may be used as a b
Page 73 and 74: esponding state is modifying a supp
Page 75 and 76: [T]he duration of the support oblig
Page 77 and 78: A future payment of child support i
Page 79 and 80: Such a credit clause does not viola
Page 81 and 82: State on behalf of L.L.B. v. Hill,
Page 83 and 84: (1) That withholding is not proper
Page 85 and 86: Source: Laws 1974, LB 354, § 226,
Page 87 and 88: In re Interest of Lakota Z. & Jacob
Page 89 and 90: Note: In July 2008 the Federal Chil
Page 91 and 92: Erica J. v. Dewitt, 265 Neb. 728, 6
Page 93 and 94: Moore v. Bauer, 11 Neb. App. 572, 6
Page 95 and 96: Sears v. Larson, 259 Neb. 760, 612
Page 97 and 98: health care coverage is not availab
Page 99 and 100: Druba v. Druba , 238 Neb. 279, 470
Page 101 and 102: Rouse v. Rouse, 18 Neb. App. 128, 7
Page 103 and 104: There is a presumption that income
Page 105 and 106: The Nebraska Supreme Court has not
Page 107 and 108: §42-364.12 Child support; withhold
Page 109 and 110:
Source: Laws 1985, Second Spec. Ses
Page 111 and 112:
shall withhold for each notice the
Page 113 and 114:
forward the child support payment.
Page 115 and 116:
Servicemembers Civil Relief Act of
Page 117 and 118:
Judgments (see also Jurisdiction) 2
Page 119 and 120:
Source: Laws 1972, LB 820, § 5; La
Page 121 and 122:
[J]urisdiction is the inherent powe
Page 123 and 124:
A nonimmigrant alien authorized to
Page 125 and 126:
In re Interest of Tamika S. et al.,
Page 127 and 128:
action to certify the license holde
Page 129 and 130:
NCP had no control as to when trust
Page 131 and 132:
[T]he district court abused its dis
Page 133 and 134:
Note: In response to a new federal
Page 135 and 136:
(1) Child support orders in cases i
Page 137 and 138:
§43-512.17. Title IV-D child suppo
Page 139 and 140:
In the initial determination of chi
Page 141 and 142:
The federal government provides Soc
Page 143 and 144:
Material change in circumstances in
Page 145 and 146:
Peter v. Peter, 262 Neb. 1017, 637
Page 147 and 148:
See also: Wilkins v. Wilkins, 269 N
Page 149 and 150:
Adoption/Modification of the Nebras
Page 151 and 152:
A party seeking to modify a dissolu
Page 153 and 154:
(2)The department, through its agen
Page 155 and 156:
§ 43-1408.01 Notarized acknowledgm
Page 157 and 158:
(4) All judgments under this sectio
Page 159 and 160:
See also Shermanv. Neth, 283 Neb. 8
Page 161 and 162:
grounds of newly discovered evidenc
Page 163 and 164:
Fianna has resided with Jeffrey sin
Page 165 and 166:
State on Behalf of Hopkins v. Batt,
Page 167 and 168:
(4) . . . (a) If any case contains
Page 169 and 170:
CONVENTION ON THE INTERNATIONAL REC
Page 171 and 172:
To prevail on a motion to remove a
Page 173 and 174:
Cooper v. Cooper, 8 Neb. App. 532,
Page 175 and 176:
What God -- or the State -- has law
Page 177 and 178:
court should take into consideratio
Page 179 and 180:
Federal Express (FedEx): FedEx Prio
Page 181 and 182:
(c) PENALTY FOR MAKING OR USING FAL
Page 183 and 184:
Recipients who are married and file
Page 185 and 186:
provision for support is a part of
Page 187 and 188:
Material change in circumstances in
Page 189 and 190:
[A]limony should not be used to equ
Page 191 and 192:
contumacious, but it provides no re
Page 193 and 194:
parties will have to start over aga
Page 195 and 196:
state has and shall exercise contin
Page 197 and 198:
§ 42-735 Administrative enforcemen
Page 199 and 200:
(2) notify the nonregistering party
Page 201 and 202:
allegations of a petition invokes t
Page 203 and 204:
petitioner had failed to come to th
Page 205 and 206:
. . . have the force and effect of
Page 207 and 208:
caused or contributed to the cause
Page 209 and 210:
in determining the child support ob
Page 211 and 212:
Effective January 1, 2013, the maxi
Page 213 and 214:
§ 6-1521. Protection of personal a
Page 215 and 216:
In contrast to recent years, the 20
Page 217 and 218:
Military Retirement pay info - www.
Page 219 and 220:
Daily Legal Newswire - www.law.com/
Page 221:
Above All Else: Keep your sense of
show all

Child Support Enforcement - Sarpy County Nebraska

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?