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.
Little v. Streater, 452 U.S. 1, 101 S.Ct. 2202, 68 L.Ed.2d 627 (1981)<br />
‣ The denial of the aid of a genetic test to indigent defendants in state-initiated<br />
paternity suits violates due process.<br />
Mathews v. Mathews, 267 Neb. 604, 676 N.W.2d 42 (2004)<br />
A finding of indigency is a matter within the initial discretion of the trial court, and<br />
such a finding will not be set aside on appeal in the absence of an abuse of<br />
discretion by the trial court.<br />
Seymour v. Froelich, 236 Neb. 808, 464 N.W.2d 310 (1991)<br />
Citing: Restatement (Second) of Conflict of Laws § 108 at 321 (1971)<br />
a “judgment for the payment of money will not be enforced in other states unless<br />
the amount to be paid has been finally determined under the local law of the<br />
state of rendition.”<br />
State v. Yelli, 247 Neb. 785, 530 N.W.2d 250 (1995)<br />
Because the burdens of proof would be the same, a judgment in a civil paternity<br />
adjudication is res judicata as between the same parties in a subsequent civil<br />
action such as a support modification proceeding.<br />
Evidence of prior civil adjudications has been admitted in a subsequent criminal<br />
nonsupport proceeding to establish the defendant’s obligation to support his<br />
child. The prior civil adjudications are admitted as nonconclusive evidence of the<br />
defendant’s support obligation.<br />
But: The judgment in a civil paternity action is not binding under the doctrines of<br />
res judicata or collateral estoppel in a subsequent criminal case.<br />
Prior paternity adjudications lack reliability if they do not affirmatively show that<br />
the alleged father was represented by or waived his right to counsel.<br />
Both federal and state due process dictate that an indigent defendant in a stateassisted<br />
civil paternity action has the right to the services of appointed counsel.<br />
* Query…what do you do when the alleged father defaults in his paternity case? Did he<br />
waive his right to counsel?<br />
Contempt<br />
What follows is a discussion of statutory and case law on CIVIL contempt. Almost<br />
exclusively when an obligated parent (OP) is brought into court for nonpayment of child support<br />
it is on a civil petition for contempt, rather than the more harsh criminal contempt. The OP is<br />
said to “hold the keys to the jail cell in his hands” and be able to release him/her self upon the<br />
mere payment of the support that is owed as set forth in the court order. Notwithstanding this<br />
fact, civil contempt has quasi criminal elements, as it can, and often does ultimately result in the<br />
incarceration of the OP. For this reason, a court that accepts an admission of civil contempt<br />
from an OP must produce a record that the admission is entered voluntarily, that the OP<br />
understands the nature of the admission, and its consequences, including the possible penalty.<br />
Analogizing an admission of civil contempt to a court accepting a guilty plea in a criminal<br />
proceeding is appropriate, and the colloquy between the court and the OP should be similar to<br />
that in a criminal plea proceeding. See State of <strong>Nebraska</strong> v. Benson, 199 Neb. 549, 260<br />
N.W.2d 208 (1977)<br />
- 35 -