Child Support Enforcement - Sarpy County Nebraska
Child Support Enforcement - Sarpy County Nebraska
Child Support Enforcement - Sarpy County Nebraska
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
See also: Wilkins v. Wilkins, 269 Neb. 937, 697 N.W.2d 280 (2005)<br />
Rood v. Rood, 4 Neb. App. 455, 545 N.W.2d 138 (1996)<br />
When an order for child support provides for the payment of stipulated sums monthly<br />
for the support of minor children, such payments become vested in the payee as<br />
they accrue, and courts are generally without authority to reduce the amounts of<br />
such accrued payments.<br />
The <strong>Nebraska</strong> Supreme Court has, depending upon the equities involved, approved<br />
modification of a child support order retroactive to the filing date of the application for<br />
modification.<br />
Whether or not a child has been emancipated is a question of fact, to be determined<br />
on the peculiar facts and circumstances of each case.<br />
Rutherford v. Rutherford, 277 Neb. 301, 761 N.W.2d 922 (2009)<br />
If a trial court fails to prepare the applicable worksheets, the parties are required to<br />
request that such worksheet be included in the trial court’s order. Orders for child<br />
support or modification which do not contain such worksheets will on appeal be<br />
summarily remanded to the trial court so that it can prepare the worksheets as<br />
required by the guidelines. Such requirement is set forth in this court’s rules. [§4-<br />
203}<br />
Under the guidelines, a deviation in the amount of child support is allowed<br />
“‘whenever the application of the guidelines in an individual case would be unjust or<br />
inappropriate.’”<br />
In the event of a deviation from the guidelines, the trial court should “state the<br />
amount of support that would have been required under the guidelines absent the<br />
deviation and include the reason for the deviation in the findings portion of the<br />
decree or order, or complete and file worksheet 5 in the court file.”<br />
The guidelines provided that a parent who requests an adjustment in child support<br />
for health insurance premiums “must submit proof of the cost of the premium.”<br />
Sabatka v. Sabatka, 245 Neb. 109, 511 N.W.2d 107 (1994)<br />
An excellent discussion of when a parent should be allowed to change career<br />
paths and obtain a reduction of his child support, and when he should not.<br />
Facts: Noncustodial parent suffered neck and back injuries resulting in a 25% disability,<br />
preventing him from working his old job as a warehouse clerk. Rather than seeking another job,<br />
even one requiring no lifting, the father, although holding an associate degree in diesel<br />
technology, elected to pursue more education in order to get a better job. His tuition was paid in<br />
full under the provisions of the Workers’<br />
Compensation Act, as are his textbooks. In<br />
addition, he received weekly disability benefits.<br />
He also received a scholarship from a veterans’<br />
group which has paid, or will pay, him $500. He<br />
works up to 16 hours a week as a grocery store<br />
clerk. He then filed for a reduction in his child<br />
support.<br />
“”material change in circumstances” is a<br />
concept which eludes precise, concise<br />
definition.” (Citations omitted)<br />
We must remember that the paramount<br />
concern and question in determining child<br />
- 135 -