Child Support Enforcement - Sarpy County Nebraska

Berg v. Hayworth, 238 Neb 527, 471 N.W.2d 435 (1991)
Child support payments are a vested right of the payee in a dissolution action as
they accrue, and such payments may be changed only by modification of the
decree.
Bevard v. Kelly, 15 Neb. App. 960, 739 N.W.2d 243 (2007)
A nunc pro tunc order operates to correct a clerical error or scrivener’s error, not
to change or revise a judgment or order, or to set aside a judgment actually
rendered, or to render an order different from the one actually rendered, even if
such order was not the order intended.
The true function of an order nunc pro tunc is to correct the record which has
been made, so that it will truly record the action really had, but which through
some inadvertence or mistake has not been truly recorded. Andrews v.
Nebraska State Railway Commission, 175 Neb. 222, 121 N.W.2d 32 (1963).
§ 25-2001(3) expressly provides that the court may correct clerical errors at any
time either on the court’s initiative or on the motion of any party.
Conrad v. Conrad, 208 Neb. 588, 304 N.W.2d 674 (1981)
Eliker v. Eliker, 206 Neb. 764, 295 N.W.2d 268 (1980)
Neither of the parties is authorized to interfere with the court’s orders and only
the court can determine what, if any, adjustments should be made.
Continental Oil Co. v. Harris, 214 Neb. 422, 333 N.W.2d 921 (1983).
[T]he office of an order nunc pro tunc is to correct a record which has been
made so that it will truly record the action had, which through inadvertence or
mistake was not truly recorded. It is not the function of an order nunc pro tunc to
change or revise a judgment or order, or to set aside a judgment actually
rendered, or to render an order different from the one actually rendered, even
though such order was not the order intended.
See also State v. Sims, 277 Neb. 192, 761 N.W.2d 527 (2009)
[T]he general rule that a judgment is no longer open to amendment, revision,
modification, or correction after the term at which it was rendered does not apply
where the purpose is to correct or amend clerical or formal errors so as to make
the record entry speak the truth and show the judgment which was actually
rendered by the court.
Given the discrepancy between the orally pronounced sentence … and the
written entry relating thereto, we conclude that the orally pronounced sentence is
controlling
Neb. Rev. Stat. §25-2001(3) (Reissue 2008) states that “[c]lerical mistakes in
judgments, orders, or other parts of the record and errors therein arising from
oversight or omission may be corrected by the court by an order nunc pro tunc at
any time on the court’s initiative or on the motion of any party . . . .”
Dartmann v. Dartmann, 14 Neb. App. 864, 717 N.W.2d 519 (2006)
[T]he district court’s ability to discharge an arrearage of child support hinges on
satisfactory proof that a judgment has been fully paid or satisfied by the act of
both parties. Neb. Rev. Stat. §42-369(4) (Reissue 2004) provides, in part, that
“[o]rders, decrees, and judgments for temporary or permanent support or alimony
- 198 -