Child Support Enforcement - Sarpy County Nebraska

[T]he district court abused its discretion in quashing the subpoena [duces tecum,
seeking NCP’s recent tax returns, life insurance info, home appraisal info and
related documents as to his earning capacity]. The fact in issue is whether the
subordination requested would unduly reduce the security regarding the remaining
amount of approximately $182,000 in child support and alimony. Clearly, the items
requested by [the mother] were relevant to a determination of [the NCP’s] financial
status and whether the child support and alimony liens should be subordinated in
order to allow Michael to refinance his real estate.
NCP has the burden to demonstrate that the release or subordination is not
requested for the purpose of avoiding payment and that the release or subordination
will not unduly reduce the security. The failure to produce an appraised value of the
real estate and the failure to produce evidence of income tax returns and projected
income tax returns leaves the court without any reasonable basis for determining
whether to subordinate the child support and alimony liens. Since [the NCP] is
asking for equitable relief, it is his obligation to produce the information which will
support such relief. We therefore conclude that the district court erred in
subordinating the liens without first having sufficient information before it.
Halsted v. Halsted, 169 Neb. 325, 99 N.W.2d 384 (1959)
Parker v. Parker, 10 Neb. App. 658, 636 N.W.2d 385 (2001)
A judgment lien does not attach to mere legal title where equitable and beneficial
interests are in another. A judgment lien is a lien only on the actual interest of the
judgment debtor, and a judgment lien is subject to all existing equities, whether of
record or not.
A lien for unpaid child support comes into existence only upon service of the
summons of the action seeking unpaid child support. Also see Nowka v. Nowka,
157 Neb. 57, 58 N.W.2d 600 (1953)
State v. Merrill, 273 Neb. 583, 731 N.W.2d 570 (2007)
Facts: Merrill was charged with several felony charges, including child abuse. His grandfather
posted his $5,000 criminal appearance bond, then Merrill assigned the right to get the bond
back to his grandfather. Meantime, the State filed an “Affidavit of Lien for Child Support” in
the criminal case. Later, Merrill was sentenced to imprisonment on the felony charges, and his
grandfather sought to have the bond money back. The clerk of district court refused, due to the
state’s lien. Merrill appealed. The district court heard and considered the matter as part of the
criminal case, and ordered the bond receipts returned to the grandfather. The state appealed.
We conclude that the State was not authorized to appeal the (district court’s) order
in this criminal case and that therefore, this court lacks jurisdiction over this appeal.
Absent specific statutory authorization, the State, as a general rule, has no right to
appeal an adverse ruling in a criminal case.
- 125 -