Child Support Enforcement - Sarpy County Nebraska

More documents

Recommendations

Info

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



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

The district court correctly noted that the State’s remedy is in the civil case. (Note: the court did not spell out what exactly that remedy is. One possibility would have been to file an Order to Show Cause against Merrill, introduce evidence of the bond receipt in his name, then have the court order it held by the court, or clerk of court, until the criminal case was concluded, then instead of giving it back to the father, assign it to the child support Payment Center for disbursement to the custodial parent. Note further, however, that although the bond receipt was technically in the name of the defendant/father, it was probably not really his money. State law requires all bond receipts to list the defendant as the owner of the bond money. Absent evidence that the bond money was actually the defendant’s to begin with, you might question the propriety of taking the funds from an innocent third party to pay the defendant’s child support.) Marriage (see also Same Sex Marriage) Hills v. State, 61 Neb. 589, 85 N.W. 836 (1901) If marriage is valid where celebrated, it is valid in this state. In Re Estate of Everhart, 18 Neb. App. 413, 783 N.W.2d 1 (May 2010) Facts: you really shouldn’t take that keen of an interest in your first cousin. Look what happens when you do… A void marriage is not valid for any legal purpose; the marriage is void ab initio by statute, and its invalidity may be maintained in any proceeding in any court between any proper parties whether in the lifetime or after the death of the supposed husband and wife, and whether the question arises directly by petition for an annulment or collaterally in other proceedings. Medicaid Reimbursement/ Medical Support (See also Health Insurance/Cash Medical Support) This area is in a state of flux. Nebraska’s DHHS CSE office released a letter in May 2008 which instructed local offices and CSE attorneys to stop seeking to obtain, or obtaining, new orders requiring Noncustodial Parents to repay Medicaid/medical debts to the state, and further to discontinue enforcement of existing orders for Medicaid reimbursement. This action was precipitated by the Federal HHS CSE office, which has ruled such enforcement activities are outside the Federal IV-D program mandates. Federal legislation has been proposed that would remove from the IV-D program any mention of collecting birth related medical expenses. - 126 -
Note: In response to a new federal definition of the term “reasonable in cost” as pertains to dependent health insurance or “cash medical support”, which definition was approved in July 2008 in the Federal Child Support Regulations, Nebraska’s HHS agency secured an amendment to our laws that defines “reasonably available” to equate to 3% or less of a parent’s gross monthly income. This change is contained in LB 288, effective 9/30/2009 (see § 42-369). Note: the concept of “cash medical support” only applies to “IV-D” cases at this time. The Feds have a broad view of what constitutes “cash medical support”. It can mean something as simple as ordering a parent to share uncovered medical expenses of the minor child. This is something routinely done in all cases except where the obligated parent has a very low income. Note also that “cash medical” awards cannot have the effect of putting the parent below the poverty guidelines as set forth in state and federal law. See the section on Guidelines Issues and Health Insurance in this outline for further information. State on Behalf of Dunn v. Wiegand, 2 Neb. App. 580, 512 N.W.2d 419 (1994) If action is filed on behalf of minor child by the state, the state cannot seek reimbursement by the father for medical expenses of the mother paid by the state if the child is more than 4 years of age. See also State v. Oglesby, 244 Neb. 880, 510 N.W.2d 53 (1994) “the trial court ordered judgment ‘for medical expenses incurred in relation to the pregnancy, confinement and recovery of [the mother] in the birth of [the child].’ That part of the judgment is not based on the rights of the child, but is in relation to the rights of the child’s mother. As such, it was barred by the applicable 4-year statute of limitations affecting the rights of the mother or the mother’s assignee. Section 43- 1411 does not extend the statute of limitations for anyone other than the minor child involved.” Minors – NEW! Carlos H. vs. Lindsay M., 203 Neb. 1004, 815 N.W. 2d 168 (June 2012) Held: One minor lacks the legal capacity to sue on his/her own behalf. And a minor may not be sued personally. A guardian ad litem or next friend must file the action on behalf of the minor. Carlos was 15 years old at the time this action was filed. The county court determined that because Carlos was a minor, he was incapable of bringing the action in his own name. Lindsay was also 15 years old. We must therefore decide whether either party had the capacity to sue or be sued. §25-307 - Except as provided by the Nebraska Probate Code, the action of an infant shall be commenced, maintained, and prosecuted by his or her guardian or next friend. Such actions may be dismissed with or without prejudice by the guardian or next friend only with approval of the court. When the action is commenced by his or her next friend, the court has power to dismiss it, if it is not for the benefit of the infant, or to substitute the guardian of the infant, or any person, as the next friend. Any action taken pursuant to this section shall be binding upon the infant. In this state an action of an infant must be brought by his guardian or next friend and when such an action is brought by a guardian of the infant, the court has power, for cause, to substitute the next friend in place of the guardian.... The district court has - 127 -
Page 1 and 2:
The Unicameral remains in session u
Page 3 and 4:
Table of Contents:* * (accessible v
Page 5 and 6:
Table of Contents (continued): Mili
Page 7 and 8:
A Note for Legal Practitioners: Mem
Page 9 and 10:
Secondly, I have taken the approach
Page 11 and 12:
sections, the county attorney or au
Page 13 and 14:
final court-ordered determination t
Page 15 and 16:
clerk of the district court in whic
Page 17 and 18:
(1) In proceedings under sections 4
Page 19 and 20:
Nebraska courts, through their inhe
Page 21 and 22:
place. This recommendation recogniz
Page 23 and 24:
(4) Orders, decrees, and judgments
Page 25 and 26:
Mother apparently consents to this
Page 27 and 28:
Johnson v. Johnson, 215 Neb. 689, 3
Page 29 and 30:
stand dismissed without prejudice a
Page 31 and 32:
This case includes an excellent sum
Page 33 and 34:
Koch v. Koch, 226 Neb. 305, 312, 41
Page 35 and 36:
We conclude that the state was not
Page 37 and 38:
Modifying the amounts awarded to a
Page 39 and 40:
[P]ublic policy forbids enforcement
Page 41 and 42:
Carroll v. Moore, 228 Neb. 561, 423
Page 43 and 44:
(3) … A rebuttable presumption of
Page 45 and 46:
Lenz v. Lenz, 222 Neb. 85, 382 N.W.
Page 47 and 48:
Finally, we conclude that for futur
Page 49 and 50:
(7) Criminal nonsupport is a Class
Page 51 and 52:
A mother’s testimony that one is
Page 53 and 54:
Neither of the parties is authorize
Page 55 and 56:
In guardianship termination proceed
Page 57 and 58:
Weinand v. Weinand, 260 Neb. 146, 6
Page 59 and 60:
verification forms instead of tax r
Page 61 and 62:
State v. Cummings, 2 Neb. App. 820,
Page 63 and 64:
Where parents of the child are sepa
Page 65 and 66:
any unpaid child support obligation
Page 67 and 68:
Henderson v. Henderson, 264 Neb. 91
Page 69 and 70:
(0,1,2,or 3+) and how much “earne
Page 71 and 72:
Earning capacity may be used as a b
Page 73 and 74:
esponding state is modifying a supp
Page 75 and 76:
[T]he duration of the support oblig
Page 77 and 78:
A future payment of child support i
Page 79 and 80:
Such a credit clause does not viola
Page 81 and 82: State on behalf of L.L.B. v. Hill,
Page 83 and 84: (1) That withholding is not proper
Page 85 and 86: Source: Laws 1974, LB 354, § 226,
Page 87 and 88: In re Interest of Lakota Z. & Jacob
Page 89 and 90: Note: In July 2008 the Federal Chil
Page 91 and 92: Erica J. v. Dewitt, 265 Neb. 728, 6
Page 93 and 94: Moore v. Bauer, 11 Neb. App. 572, 6
Page 95 and 96: Sears v. Larson, 259 Neb. 760, 612
Page 97 and 98: health care coverage is not availab
Page 99 and 100: Druba v. Druba , 238 Neb. 279, 470
Page 101 and 102: Rouse v. Rouse, 18 Neb. App. 128, 7
Page 103 and 104: There is a presumption that income
Page 105 and 106: The Nebraska Supreme Court has not
Page 107 and 108: §42-364.12 Child support; withhold
Page 109 and 110: Source: Laws 1985, Second Spec. Ses
Page 111 and 112: shall withhold for each notice the
Page 113 and 114: forward the child support payment.
Page 115 and 116: Servicemembers Civil Relief Act of
Page 117 and 118: Judgments (see also Jurisdiction) 2
Page 119 and 120: Source: Laws 1972, LB 820, § 5; La
Page 121 and 122: [J]urisdiction is the inherent powe
Page 123 and 124: A nonimmigrant alien authorized to
Page 125 and 126: In re Interest of Tamika S. et al.,
Page 127 and 128: action to certify the license holde
Page 129 and 130: NCP had no control as to when trust
Page 131: [T]he district court abused its dis
Page 135 and 136: (1) Child support orders in cases i
Page 137 and 138: §43-512.17. Title IV-D child suppo
Page 139 and 140: In the initial determination of chi
Page 141 and 142: The federal government provides Soc
Page 143 and 144: Material change in circumstances in
Page 145 and 146: Peter v. Peter, 262 Neb. 1017, 637
Page 147 and 148: See also: Wilkins v. Wilkins, 269 N
Page 149 and 150: Adoption/Modification of the Nebras
Page 151 and 152: A party seeking to modify a dissolu
Page 153 and 154: (2)The department, through its agen
Page 155 and 156: § 43-1408.01 Notarized acknowledgm
Page 157 and 158: (4) All judgments under this sectio
Page 159 and 160: See also Shermanv. Neth, 283 Neb. 8
Page 161 and 162: grounds of newly discovered evidenc
Page 163 and 164: Fianna has resided with Jeffrey sin
Page 165 and 166: State on Behalf of Hopkins v. Batt,
Page 167 and 168: (4) . . . (a) If any case contains
Page 169 and 170: CONVENTION ON THE INTERNATIONAL REC
Page 171 and 172: To prevail on a motion to remove a
Page 173 and 174: Cooper v. Cooper, 8 Neb. App. 532,
Page 175 and 176: What God -- or the State -- has law
Page 177 and 178: court should take into consideratio
Page 179 and 180: Federal Express (FedEx): FedEx Prio
Page 181 and 182: (c) PENALTY FOR MAKING OR USING FAL
Page 183 and 184:
Recipients who are married and file
Page 185 and 186:
provision for support is a part of
Page 187 and 188:
Material change in circumstances in
Page 189 and 190:
[A]limony should not be used to equ
Page 191 and 192:
contumacious, but it provides no re
Page 193 and 194:
parties will have to start over aga
Page 195 and 196:
state has and shall exercise contin
Page 197 and 198:
§ 42-735 Administrative enforcemen
Page 199 and 200:
(2) notify the nonregistering party
Page 201 and 202:
allegations of a petition invokes t
Page 203 and 204:
petitioner had failed to come to th
Page 205 and 206:
. . . have the force and effect of
Page 207 and 208:
caused or contributed to the cause
Page 209 and 210:
in determining the child support ob
Page 211 and 212:
Effective January 1, 2013, the maxi
Page 213 and 214:
§ 6-1521. Protection of personal a
Page 215 and 216:
In contrast to recent years, the 20
Page 217 and 218:
Military Retirement pay info - www.
Page 219 and 220:
Daily Legal Newswire - www.law.com/
Page 221:
Above All Else: Keep your sense of
show all

Child Support Enforcement - Sarpy County Nebraska

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?