Child Support Enforcement - Sarpy County Nebraska
Child Support Enforcement - Sarpy County Nebraska
Child Support Enforcement - Sarpy County Nebraska
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
Sears v. Larson, 259 Neb. 760, 612 N.W.2d 474 (2000)<br />
Paragraph C (5) [now § 4-203 (E)] of the guidelines allows a trial court in an<br />
appropriate case to deviate from the guidelines to allow a deduction from income<br />
based on a parent’s student loan payment. [§4-203] of the guidelines provides that<br />
the guidelines shall be applied as a rebuttable presumption. However, pursuant to<br />
[§4-203 (E)], deviations from the guidelines are permissible “whenever the<br />
application of the guidelines in an individual case would be unjust or inappropriate.”<br />
Smith-Helstrom v. Yonker, 249 Neb. 449, 544 N.W.2d 93 (1996)<br />
The proper amount of child support is determined not necessarily by a parent’s<br />
earnings, but by a parent’s earning capacity.<br />
Sneckenberg v. Sneckenberg, 9 Neb. App. 609, 616 N.W.2d 68 (2000)<br />
[A]n upward revision of the guidelines constitutes a material change of<br />
circumstances that can warrant upward modification of a parent’s child support<br />
obligation, independent of changes in that parent’s income.<br />
Snyder v. Chandler, No. A-00-460 (Not designated for permanent publication, 2001)<br />
[§ 4-218] prohibits the setting of child support payments which will reduce a parent’s net<br />
monthly income below a certain amount and further provides that the $50 minimum<br />
payment provided for in [§ 4-209] is permissive and within the trial court’s discretion. See<br />
Neb. Rev. Stat. §49-802(1)<br />
State v. Oglesby, 244 Neb. 880, 510 N.W.2d 53 (1994)<br />
Facts: Mother got pregnant out of wedlock in 1976. <strong>Child</strong> born in 1977 and had little contact<br />
with bio father. Mother did not want bio father in the child’s life. Nearly thirteen years later<br />
mother went on state assistance and state filed paternity action. Father shown to be bio dad<br />
and trial court sets support in strict compliance with child support guidelines, giving no<br />
consideration to the fact that father was supporting his family of 5 on just his paychecks. Held:<br />
strict compliance with child support guidelines would be inequitable under the facts of this case.<br />
… the support ordered by the court in this case gives no consideration at all to the<br />
present children, we find that the trial court abused its discretion in not first<br />
determining that, under the particular facts of this case, the strict application of the<br />
guidelines would be unjust or inappropriate, as set out in the <strong>Nebraska</strong> <strong>Child</strong><br />
<strong>Support</strong> Guidelines, paragraph C(5).<br />
State on Behalf of Martinez v. Martinez-Ibarra, 281 Neb. 547, 797 N.W.2d 222 (May<br />
2011)<br />
The child support guidelines do not allow for a deduction on Worksheet #1 for cash<br />
medical support. But see changes to the guidelines effective 09/01/11, that do!<br />
The requirement that the custodial parent pay the first $480 of nonreimbursed<br />
medical expenses per year does not serve to reduce the amount of cash medical<br />
support ordered.<br />
Stuczynski v. Stuczynski, 238 Neb. 368, 471 N.W.2d 122 (1991)<br />
The child support guidelines set out a rebuttable presumption of a fair and equitable<br />
child support order.<br />
Wilkins v. Wilkins, 269 Neb. 937, 697 N.W.2d 280 (2005)<br />
The twists and turns in the facts of this case are far too long to repeat here.<br />
- 89 -