Child Support Enforcement - Sarpy County Nebraska

[T]he duration of the support obligation remains fixed despite the subsequent
residence of all parties in a new state with a different duration of child support.
Wulff v. Wulff, 243 Neb. 616, 500 N.W.2d 845 (1993)
Whether there has been an emancipation is a question of fact, but what is emancipation
is a question of law.
Emancipation is not necessarily a continuing status; even if once established, it
may be terminated at any time during the child’s minority.
A minor child giving birth may be one factor to be considered in the determination
of whether a minor has achieved a new status or position inconsistent with parental
control, but should not alone be dispositive.
24A Am. Jur. 2d Divorce and Separation § 1042 (1998)
[a] child who is attending college full-time, living with a parent during vacations
and holidays, and who is employed only in the summer, is not emancipated.
Likewise, a child who lives away from home but whose parents pay a substantial
amount of money for medical and educational expenses and independent-living
arrangements is not emancipated.
Equity, Equitable Estoppel, Equitable Credit/”Overpayments”
(See also Child Support & Related, Social Security)
Berg v. Hayworth, 238 Neb 527, 471 N.W.2d 435 (1991) Permits equitable credits
Bock v. Dalbey, 283 Neb. 984, ____ N.W.2d ____ (June 2012)
when a statute provides an adequate remedy at law, equity will not entertain
jurisdiction, and a party must exhaust the statutory remedy before it may resort to
equity. [citing Teadtke v. Havranek, 279 Neb. 284, 777 N.W.2d 810 (2010)]
Cotton v. Cotton, 222 Neb. 306, 383 NW2d 739 (1986)
A court has an inherent power to determine the status of its judgments. The district
court may, on motion and satisfactory proof that a judgment had been fully paid or
satisfied by the act of the parties thereto, order it discharged and canceled of record.
Eliker v. Eliker, 206 Neb. 764, 295 N.W.2d 268 (1980)
Courts are without authority to reduce the amount of accrued child support (absent
equitable estoppel).
Gress v. Gress; 257 Neb. 112; 596 N.W.2d 8 (1999) (Gress I)
Hanthorn v. Hanthorn 236 Neb 225, 460 N.W.2d 650 (1990)
Social Security payments made to a parent’s child on account of the parent’s
disability should be considered as credits towards the parents’ court ordered
obligation in the absence of circumstances making credit inequitable. Such benefit
payments are the result of the obligor’s disability and are a substitute for the
obligor’s loss of earning power and his or her obligation to pay for the support of his
or her dependents.
- 69 -