Child Support Enforcement - Sarpy County Nebraska
Child Support Enforcement - Sarpy County Nebraska
Child Support Enforcement - Sarpy County Nebraska
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
in loco parentis to the child. See, Hickenbottom v. Hickenbottom, 239 Neb. 579,<br />
477 N.W.2d 8 (1991).<br />
‘A person standing in loco parentis to a child is one who has put himself in the<br />
situation of a lawful parent by assuming the obligations incident to the parental<br />
relation, without going through the formalities necessary to a legal adoption, and the<br />
rights, duties, and liabilities of such person are the same as those of the lawful<br />
parent. The assumption of the relation is a question of intention, which may be<br />
shown by the acts and declarations of the person alleged to stand in that relation.’<br />
See, Austin v. Austin, 147 Neb. 109, 22 N.W.2d 560 (1946)<br />
A non-bio father may at one time have intended to stand in loco parentis to a<br />
child by naming the child after him and paying child support pursuant to a<br />
dissolution decree, but that does not permanently forestall a court from finding<br />
another man to be the biological father of the child, and ordering child support<br />
An acknowledgment of paternity by another person is not conclusive in an action<br />
to establish paternity in the biological father.<br />
State on Behalf of Joseph F. v. Rial, 251 Neb. 1, 554 N.W.2d 769 (1996)<br />
A district court retains jurisdiction for orders regarding child support<br />
notwithstanding the fact that a paternity determination is on appeal.<br />
State ex rel. Storz v. Storz, 235 Neb. 368, 455 N.W.2d 182 (1990)<br />
If a father and mother were still married* when the child was conceived, the child is<br />
their legitimate offspring, and he or she is a product of their marriage, even if they<br />
later divorce before the child is born.<br />
* before the divorce becomes final<br />
State v. Cummings, 2 Neb. App. 820, 515 N.W.2d 680 (1994)<br />
Where a defendant is in default, the allegations of the petition are to be taken as<br />
true against him, except allegations of value and amount of damage, and if the<br />
petition states a cause of action, the plaintiff is entitled to judgment without proof<br />
except as to the quantum of damages. (Paternity corroboration language in §43-<br />
1412 does not override basic default rule)<br />
State v. Yelli, 247 Neb. 785, 530 N.W.2d 250 (1995)<br />
In a civil action, only a preponderance of the evidence is necessary to sustain the<br />
establishment of paternity.<br />
Younkin v. Younkin, 221 Neb. 134, 375 N.W.2d 894 (1985)<br />
A fundamental fact necessary to sustain an order of child support is paternity by the<br />
man judicially obligated to pay such support.<br />
Priority of Payments<br />
§ 42-358.02. Delinquent child support payments, spousal support payments, and medical<br />
support payments; interest; rate; report; Title IV-D Division; duties.<br />
(1) . . .<br />
. . .<br />
(4) <strong>Support</strong> order payments shall be credited in the following manner:<br />
- 153 -