23.06.2014 Views

Child Support Enforcement - Sarpy County Nebraska

Child Support Enforcement - Sarpy County Nebraska

Child Support Enforcement - Sarpy County Nebraska

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Gress v. Gress, 274 Neb. 686, 743 N.W.2d 67 (2007)<br />

Issue: How many years back should a court go in averaging income of parents with fluctuating<br />

income.<br />

As a general matter, in the determination of child support, income from a selfemployed<br />

individual is determined by looking to that person’s tax returns.<br />

(Reviewing) a 3-year average (income) tends to be the most common approach in<br />

cases where a parent’s income tends to fluctuate. It is not necessary for a court to<br />

look back more than three years.<br />

A daycare obligation is also subject to paragraph R’s basic subsistence<br />

limitation.<br />

Henderson v. Henderson, 264 Neb. 916, 653 N.W.2d 226 (2002)<br />

A district court has no authority to include a child who is more than 19 years of age<br />

in its child support calculations.<br />

Henke v. Guerrero, 13 Neb. App. 337, 692 N.W.2d 762 (2005)<br />

An award of child support is equitable in nature. A trial court’s award of child support<br />

in a paternity case will not be disturbed on appeal in the absence of an abuse of<br />

discretion by the trial court. Also see Weaver v. Compton, 8 Neb. App. 961, 605<br />

N.W.2d 478 (2000)<br />

<strong>Child</strong> support in a paternity action is to be determined in the same manner as in<br />

cases of children born in lawful wedlock. See Neb. Rev. Stat. §43-1402 (Reissue<br />

2004). The resulting duty of a parent to provide such support may, under<br />

appropriate circumstances, require the award of retroactive child support. State<br />

o/b/o Joseph F. v. Rial, 251 Neb. 1, 554 N.W.2d 769 (1996)<br />

The requirement of support begins at the time of the birth of the child, whether the<br />

child is born in lawful wedlock or otherwise.<br />

Clearly, retroactive support is included in the “support” that the trial court may order<br />

under §43-1412 (3).<br />

Hildebrand v. Hildebrand, 239 Neb. 605, 477 N.W.2d 1 (1991)<br />

In case this point wasn’t self evident….<br />

Citing In re Marriage of Root, 774 S.W.2d 521 (Mo. App. 1989):<br />

It would be absurd to hold that once parents remarry each other and the<br />

family is again intact and residing in the same household, the former<br />

noncustodial parent must pay future installments of child support to the<br />

other parent per the past divorce decree. That is to say, the remarriage<br />

should terminate the former noncustodial parent’s duty to pay any child<br />

support that would have become due after the remarriage.<br />

[O]nce parties remarry, the former child support order is moot, while any<br />

deficiencies prior to the marriage are collectible.<br />

Jensen v. Jensen, 275 Neb. 921, 750 N.W.2d 335 (2008)<br />

[W]e have never held that the absence of a child support worksheet provides a<br />

basis for a collateral attack on a final judgment. Once the [child support] order<br />

became final, even without a worksheet, it was enforceable.<br />

[P]ublic policy forbids enforcement of a private agreement that purports to<br />

discharge a parent’s liability for child support, if the agreement does not adequately<br />

provide for the child.<br />

- 20 -

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!