Resources
Child Support Resource Library
Welcome to the YoungWilliams Child Support Resource Library. Search by keywords or use the filters to select categories of interest to you. Currently, our Library consists of academic and government research articles and reports from around the country, federal opinions, and case law from states in which our full service child support projects are located.
Kleoudis v. Kleoudis (North Carolina 2020)
For parents with incomes above the guidelines, child support will be determined on a case-by-case basis. The child support amount should be based on the amount of support necessary to meet the child’s reasonable needs in light of the parents’ estates, earnings, and standard of living. In this divorce case, the parents had incomes above the North Carolina child support guidelines. To set support, the trial court took into account each parent’s after-tax income, the position in which the property settlement left each parent, and each parent’s expenses. The father appealed the child support determination.
Frost v. Monahan (Nebraska 2020)
Nebraska statute provides for an abatement of child support during extended visitation but the trial court has discretion over its application. The mother and father had a child and shared parenting time under a Stipulated Agreement. The father filed to modify custody, and the mother counterclaimed, requesting permission to move out of state. The trial court found a change in circumstances and granted the father legal custody and physical custody during the school year. The mother was awarded visitation every other weekend, during school breaks, and during the summer. The mother appealed the order on several grounds including the trial court’s denial of her request to abate child support during summer visitation.
Ybarra v. Ybarra (Nebraska 2020)
State and federal law control the amount of money that can be withheld for child support. The father, who owed child support arrears and interest, requested a modification of the amount of money being withheld from his social security. He also requested that the interest be removed. He argued that the amount withheld placed him below the subsistence levels in the child support guidelines. The trial court denied his requests. The father appealed.
Kimzey v. Kimzey (Wyoming 2020)
To modify a stipulated child support order, there must be a substantial change of circumstances in addition to the required change in the support amount. The parents divorced and in the decree stipulated to a child support amount lower than the guideline amount. Following the mother’s move to Arizona, the father filed to modify custody and support. The district court found that mother’s move was a material change of circumstances but found it didn’t warrant a change in custody. The district upwardly modified the father’s support obligation based on a change in the amount of support. The father appealed.
Guthard v. Guthard (Nebraska 2020)
Determining income for child support for a parent who is a shareholder in a corporation is a fact specific determination. The mother filed to modify child support alleging that the father’s income had increased substantially. The father was a 50 percent shareholder in an S corporation. The mother argued the Father’s child support income should include his salary, the earnings retained by the corporation, distributions meant to cover taxes, and rental income from another business. The trial court denied the modification, and the mother appealed.
Bornhorst v. Bornhorst (Nebraska 2020)
Distributions to corporate shareholders intended to cover tax liability are not necessarily income for child support purposes. The parents filed for divorce. The mother worked for her family’s construction company. To determine her income for child support, the court used the wages reported on her W-2 form but didn’t include other distributions she received as a company shareholder. She testified the distributions were meant to cover her tax liability and that she had no control over the amount or the timing. The trial court didn’t include these amounts in her income.
In re Shockman (Kansas 2020)
The trial court has the authority to manage legal proceedings, which can include delegation of child support matter to a court trustee. The father filed to modify the custody and support provisions of a divorce decree. The scheduling order indicated that the child support would be referred to the court trustee. The trial court heard the proceeding and at the close stated it had adequate information to determine child support. The trial court issued an order modifying support downward and entering a judgement for arrears.
Using Principles of Procedural Justice to Engage Disconnected Parents
Engaging parents with the child support program is hard. The federal Office of Child Support Enforcement funded the Procedural Justice-Informed Alternatives to Contempt (PJAC) grant to explore ways to integrate procedural justice principles into child support enforcement. This brief explores ways that the principles were used to improve parent engagement with the program. There are five main elements of procedural justice: respect, understanding, voice, neutrality, and helpfulness. To increase engagement, the grant recipients applied these principles to the various ways they communicate with parents.
Pumroy v. Sisco (Mississippi 2020)
A child’s emancipation is grounds for modification of a child support order. The mother and father, who had three children, divorced. The father was ordered to pay support for the three children. The father was ordered to pay support for their three children. This order was subsequently modified, and the child support provision stated that the child support would continue until such time as the children were emancipated. Several years later, the Department of Human Services filed a petition to modify support citing the oldest child’s emancipation as the substantial change. The mother opposed the petition.
Edwards v. Edwards (Wyoming)
A trial court has wide discretion to determine a parent’s status as voluntarily underemployed. Absent an abuse of discretion, the decision won’t be overturned on appeal. The parents filed for divorce. They had four children. During their marriage, they owned a lawn care business. After their separation, the father closed the business and took a lower paying data entry job. He testified to the facts around his decision to close the business including difficult hours which would prevent him from seeing the children. The court calculated support based on his current income. The mother appealed, arguing the father was voluntarily underemployed.
