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.
Covil v. Covil (Nebraska 2018)
A Nebraska district court can’t modify certain terms of another state’s order. The father and mother were divorced in Florida. The mother moved to Nebraska and received court permission to move with the children. Nebraska registered the Florida order. The Father filed to modify the order in Nebraska. He requested credit for past payments, support from the mother for a period for time he had the children, and an arrears determination. The district court declined to modify the order and the Father appealed. The Court of Appeals found that Nebraska law doesn’t allow for modification of another state’s order, and that the father should have corrected any errors in the Florida order while Florida still had jurisdiction.
Parents and Children Together: The Complex Needs of Low Income Men and How Responsible Fatherhood Programs Address Them
Broad changes in family demographics have left many children without the support or involvement of their fathers. As a result of high rates of nonmarital births and divorce, millions of American children do not live with both of their parents. OPRE Report 2018-18, prepared for the Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation (OPRE), Administration for Children and Families, has two goals: to develop a greater understanding of programmatic features that lead to strong engagement and participation by fathers, and to provide context for the evaluation’s forthcoming results on how fathers’ outcomes were affected by the programs. As a result of their findings, authors made recommendations to better engage fathers, help them overcome barriers, build parenting skills, improve economic stability, and increase assistance for child support modification.
In re Marriage of Boettcher (Colorado 2018)
The highest amount of child support on the income schedule is not a maximum presumptive amount. If the parents’ combined income is more than accounted for on the schedule, support may be more based on an application of the statutory factors. The father in this case appealed a modified support order arguing that the highest amount of support was a ceiling. The Court of Appeals disagreed and found that support can be increased if appropriate. If the ordered support is less, then the process for deviating applies.
Long v. Long (Wyoming 2018)
A district court must include the presumptive child support amount in a final decree of divorce. That is the basis for any deviation. Prior to the divorce, the mother filed for a protective order in Circuit Court, and the court set support in this action. The District Court incorporated the amount of support in the final decree. The father appealed arguing that the support amount was not supported by a financial affidavit. The Supreme Court found that the court had sufficient information about the father’s income to establish support. The father chose not to provide a financial affidavit and that he shouldn’t benefit from his disregard of the statute. However, the Supreme Court found that the decree did not set out presumptive support, and the Circuit Court order also did not contain this information. The Court remanded the case for additional findings.
Becher v. Becher (Nebraska 2018)
Chapter 25 of the Nebraska statutes allows for the appointment of a general referee to hear court proceedings, which could include a divorce. The child support statutes also provide for the appointment of a referee for specific child support proceedings, including establishment of an order. The deference the district court judge gives to the findings and conclusions in a referee’s report depends on the matter and under which statute it falls. In this case, the Nebraska Supreme Court made it clear that in a divorce decree, the district court does not have to defer to the a referee’s report regarding child support issues. For the other divorce issues, the district court can set aside findings that are against the weight of the evidence but does not have to defer to any legal conclusions or recommendations.
Fetherkile v. Fetherkile (Nebraska 2018)
A paternity determination made pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-512.04 is res judicata as to that issue. In this case, the mother and father stipulated to a paternity and support order prior to filing for divorce. The parents then filed for divorce, and the mother testified the father was not the child’s biological father. The lower court included the support amount from the paternity action in the divorce decree, and the father appealed. The Supreme Court found that a paternity order, like a divorce decree, is res judicata as long as it is made by a court of competent jurisdiction, is final, is a judgment on the merits, and the parties are the same. The Supreme Court also found that it is not necessary for a court to attach a child support worksheet in cases where the court incorporates a support amount from an existing order.
Santee v. Santee (Tennessee 2018)
If a court imputes income to a parent for child support, it must make supportive, consistent findings. In this divorce action, the mother didn’t work during the marriage and stayed at home with the children. The trial court imputed the mother to the income of a medical assistant even though mother would have to attend full-time school for two years to earn this degree. The appellate court found it made no sense to expect mother to attend school and work, both full time, at the same time. The appellate court remanded the case for a new child support calculation.
Gipson v. Jackson (Mississippi 2018)
If a court deviates from the presumptive amount of child support, it must make findings as to why the application of the guidelines is unjust or inappropriate. The father appealed the Chancery Court order that increased child support by $200. The order did not contain any specific findings as to father’s adjusted gross income or the reason for the deviation. The appellate court agreed with the father and remanded the order for specific findings as required by the statute.The Court found the increase was based on speculative income.
Custodial Mothers and Fathers and Their Child Support: 2015
This report provides an overview of children who have one parent living outside of the household and their custodial parents. The data used for this report are from the Child Support Supplement (CSS) to the April 2016 Current Population Survey (CSS) which provides demographic information about custodial parents as of 2016, as well as child support and other income or program data for the 2015 calendar year. The report also compares the current data to data collected from the 1994 April CPS CSS and subsequent biennial surveys.
McKinney v. Hamp (Mississippi 2018)
A supersedeas bond, authorized by Mississippi Rule of Appellate Procedure 8(a), will not stay enforcement of an order for prospective, monthly child support pending appeal. A signing bonus for a parent-athlete is part of the parent’s gross income for child support purposes. A court has the discretion to modify an order back to the date of the event justifying the modification. The father, an NFL player, appealed several terms of a child support order: the court’s jurisdiction over a contempt motion, the income determination, and the effective date of the modification. Rule 8(a) allows for a stay of enforcement on a money judgment if an appellant posts a bond in an amount set out in the Rule. The Supreme Court found that enforcement of a child support order cannot be stayed using this rule because the payments are prospective and not a money judgment. Instead, a parent must request a stay under Rule 8(b) and obtain court permission. The Supreme Court also found that the signing bonus was properly included as income to the father. The bonus, even though paid in one year, reasonably available to the father and was considered part of his compensation package. The Supreme Court also found the chancery court had the ability to modify the support back to the date of the signing of the NFL contract.
