Child Support Enforcement - Sarpy County Nebraska

Carroll v. Moore, 228 Neb. 561, 423 N.W.2d 757 (1988)
Persons accused of paternity have the right to court appointed counsel if found
to be indigent. This is true in non state assistance cases as well as state aid cases.
A determination of paternity in a state-initiated paternity suit is res judicata, and
therefore not open to attack in a later proceeding involving collateral issues such as
nonpayment of support.
Cammarata v. Chambers, 6 Neb. App. 467, 574 N.W.2d 530 (1998)
A child support order may consist merely of an order for “no support.” Even if
a court order provides that no support is due from either parent, that does not
change the fact that there is an existing support order.
County Attorney may not in such cases seek to obtain a support order for custodial
parent under provisions of §43-512.03 (authorizing county attorney intervention to
establish an order for child support where no order presently exists.)
Freis v. Harvey, 5 Neb. App. 679, 563 N.W.2d 363 (1997)
Child support judgments are not rendered dormant by the passage of time.
Kiplinger v. Nebraska Dept. of Nat. Resources, 282 Neb. 237, 803 N.W.2d 28 (2011)
A statute is presumed to be constitutional, and all reasonable doubts are resolved in
favor of its constitutionality. The burden of establishing the unconstitutionality of a
statute is on the one attacking its validity.
The unconstitutionality of a statute must be clearly established before it will be
declared void.
Kropf v. Kropf, 248 Neb. 614, 538 N.W.2d 496 (1995)
§§ 42-358 and 43-512.03I do not grant the district court the authority to appoint the
county attorney to pursue support obligation arrearage where the decree, order, or
judgment does not provide for child support.
Lenz v. Lenz, 222 Neb. 85, 382 N.W.2d 323 (1986)
A judgment must be sufficiently certain in its terms to be able to be enforced in a
manner provided by law.
[W]e hold that the part of the divorce decree in this case which ordered the payment
of “all of the expenses for the minor child’s special schooling” is indefinite, uncertain,
and incapable of enforcement. For these reasons it is fatally defective and cannot
be enforced.
Little v. Streater, 452 U.S. 1, 101 S.Ct. 2202, 68 L.Ed.2d 627 (1981)
‣ The denial of the aid of a genetic test to indigent defendants in state-initiated
paternity suits violates due process.
Mathews v. Mathews, 267 Neb. 604, 676 N.W.2d 42 (2004)
A finding of indigency is a matter within the initial discretion of the trial court, and
such a finding will not be set aside on appeal in the absence of an abuse of
discretion by the trial court.
- 35 -