Child Support Enforcement - Sarpy County Nebraska

More documents

Recommendations

Info

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



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

Default Judgments/Paternity § 25-2001(1) (Reissue 2008) The inherent power of a district court to vacate or modify its judgments or orders during term may also be exercised after the end of the term, upon the same grounds, upon a motion filed within six months after the entry of the judgment or order. §43-1412. Paternity; action to establish; procedure; public hearings prohibited; evidence; default judgment; decree; payment of costs and fees. (Reissue 2004) (1) …. (2) A default judgment shall be entered upon a showing of service and failure of the defendant to answer or otherwise appear. Carlson v. Two Rivers Auto, Inc. ___ Neb. App. ___ (1994) In reviewing a trial court’s action in vacating or refusing to vacate a default judgment, an appellate court will uphold and affirm the trial court’s action in the absence of an abuse of discretion. It has been held that “’ 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. . . .’” Fredericks v. Western Livestock Auction Co., 225 Neb. 211, at 217, 403 N.W.2d 377 at 382 (1987). In considering a request to set aside a default judgment, the trial court may consider the promptness of the motion to vacate, negligence or want of diligence of the party moving to vacate, and avoidance of unnecessary delays and frivolous proceedings. Modern cases consistently hold that a “party seeking to vacate a default judgment [in either county or district court] must tender an answer or other proof disclosing a meritorious defense.” Steinberg v. Stahlnecker, 200 Neb. 466, 468, 263 N.W.2d 861, 863 (1978) 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. - 50 -
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 verification forms instead of tax returns or wage stubs. 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 <strong>Nebraska</strong> 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 right hoops, and is not listed on a notarized acknowledgment of paternity. Guardians ad litem - 51 -
Page 1 and 2:
Have a Wonderful Summer! Child Supp
Page 3 and 4:
Table of Contents:* * (accessible v
Page 5 and 6: Table of Contents (continued): Mult
Page 7 and 8: A Note for Legal Practitioners: Mem
Page 9 and 10: Overview/ IV-D Attorney Duty Gangwi
Page 11 and 12: Neb. Rev. Stat. § 7-105(2) (Reissu
Page 13 and 14: See Lehr v. Robertson, 463 U.S. 248
Page 15 and 16: their attorney of record and, excep
Page 17 and 18: State ex rel. Lemon v. Gale, 272 Ne
Page 19 and 20: disobedience as an essential elemen
Page 21 and 22: student loan that the noncustodial
Page 23 and 24: having jurisdiction to compel the s
Page 25 and 26: Drew on Behalf of Reed v. Reed, 16
Page 27 and 28: income, is to be considered in dete
Page 29 and 30: § 48-802 - Statutes, General Rules
Page 31 and 32: from arriving on the scene, either
Page 33 and 34: In equity cases trial judges should
Page 35 and 36: Similarly, a party who does more th
Page 37 and 38: Common Law Marriages States that au
Page 39 and 40: Constitutional Issues/ Statutory In
Page 41 and 42: Little v. Streater, 452 U.S. 1, 101
Page 43 and 44: In re Interest of Thomas M., 282 Ne
Page 45 and 46: See Smeal Fire Apparatus Co. v. Kre
Page 47 and 48: Because a conditional commitment is
Page 49 and 50: obligation when he currently has an
Page 51 and 52: An order modifying child custody wh
Page 53 and 54: Haynes v. Haynes, 205 Neb. 35, 286
Page 55: Stuhr v. Stuhr, 240 Neb. 239, 481 N
Page 59 and 60: State on behalf of L.L.B. v. Hill,
Page 61 and 62: Due Process Conn v. Conn, 13 Neb. A
Page 63 and 64: or court order of emancipation or a
Page 65 and 66: Henderson v. Henderson, 264 Neb. 91
Page 67 and 68: they have income. There is no floor
Page 69 and 70: Lainson v. Lainson, 219 Neb. 170, 3
Page 71 and 72: Millatmal v. Millatmal, 272 Neb. 45
Page 73 and 74: 24A Am. Jur. 2d Divorce and Separat
Page 75 and 76: [T]he fact that [the custodial pare
Page 77 and 78: The same principles that apply with
Page 79 and 80: “[C]oncerns regarding the stigma
Page 81 and 82: (a) The interpretation of the suppo
Page 83 and 84: make the appointment. In other case
Page 85 and 86: Guidelines Issues (Including suffic
Page 87 and 88: Note: In July 2008 the Federal Chil
Page 89 and 90: Erica J. v. Dewitt, 265 Neb. 728, 6
Page 91 and 92: Morrill County v. Darsaklis, 7 Neb.
Page 93 and 94: Any deviation from the guidelines m
Page 95 and 96: to also pay reimbursement for reaso
Page 97 and 98: or law of another state substantial
Page 99 and 100: §43-1711 Income, defined. Income s
Page 101 and 102: Simpson v. Simpson, 275 Neb. 152, 7
Page 103 and 104: §42-364.09. Child support; withhol
Page 105 and 106: §43-1709. Employer or other payor,
Page 107 and 108:
(6) That the employer or other payo
Page 109 and 110:
income withholding for current supp
Page 111 and 112:
Title IV-D Division of the Departme
Page 113 and 114:
Held: The state was acting beyond i
Page 115 and 116:
(3) Any juvenile…whose parent, gu
Page 117 and 118:
proceeding or a new action. Since t
Page 119 and 120:
State, Dept. of Social Services v.
Page 121 and 122:
amount equal to the support due and
Page 123 and 124:
Source: Laws 1975, LB 212, § 8; La
Page 125 and 126:
The second is used in aid of an exe
Page 127 and 128:
Halsted v. Halsted, 169 Neb. 325, 9
Page 129 and 130:
Neb. Ct. R. § 4-217 Modification.
Page 131 and 132:
she had sufficient resources to pro
Page 133 and 134:
If applicable, earning capacity may
Page 135 and 136:
Gress v. Gress, 274 Neb. 686, 743 N
Page 137 and 138:
A district court may modify a regis
Page 139 and 140:
Peter v. Peter, 262 Neb. 1017, 637
Page 141 and 142:
See also: Wilkins v. Wilkins, 269 N
Page 143 and 144:
Under certain circumstances, an ame
Page 145 and 146:
A party seeking to modify a dissolu
Page 147 and 148:
(2)The department, through its agen
Page 149 and 150:
§ 43-1408.01 Notarized acknowledgm
Page 151 and 152:
§43-1414. Genetic testing; procedu
Page 153 and 154:
Carlson v. Bartels, 143 Neb. 680, 1
Page 155 and 156:
as to the paternity of the minor ch
Page 157 and 158:
Jones v. Paulson, 261 Neb. 327, 622
Page 159 and 160:
in loco parentis to the child. See,
Page 161 and 162:
(b) If the court orders income with
Page 163 and 164:
enforcement, for example, we are fo
Page 165 and 166:
ights of visitation. Later mother c
Page 167 and 168:
Matchett v. Dunkle, 244 Neb. 639, 5
Page 169 and 170:
Connecticut, the District of Columb
Page 171 and 172:
In order to stand in loco parentis,
Page 173 and 174:
Of particular interest is the requi
Page 175 and 176:
Social Security (Also see Equity, E
Page 177 and 178:
Calculate support this way: 1. Mom
Page 179 and 180:
Spousal support, when used in the c
Page 181 and 182:
punishment for sexual assault in th
Page 183 and 184:
Hall v. Hall, 238 Neb. 686, 472 N.W
Page 185 and 186:
interests of a child are served by
Page 187 and 188:
§42-722. Private counsel. An indiv
Page 189 and 190:
the following three conditions are
Page 191 and 192:
Source: Laws 1993, LB 500, § 43 §
Page 193 and 194:
Despite a basic difference in the n
Page 195 and 196:
Conrad v. Conrad, 208 Neb. 588, 304
Page 197 and 198:
Mace v. Mace, 13 Neb. App. 896, 703
Page 199 and 200:
In re Interest of Chance J., 279 Ne
Page 201 and 202:
per hour, two hour minimum. C. (1)
Page 203 and 204:
(3) If, regardless of whether payme
Page 205 and 206:
Rule 21 adopted April 16, 2008. Ren
Page 207 and 208:
Nebraska Information System (NIS):
Page 209 and 210:
web site: www.usmc-mccs.org/contact
Page 211 and 212:
FIPS FPLS IRG IV-D JUSTICE MSFIDM N
show all

Child Support Enforcement - Sarpy County Nebraska

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?