Welcome to the YoungWilliams Research & Case Law Library.  Use the filters below 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: Colorado, Kansas, Mississippi, Nebraska, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Wyoming.  Sign up to receive updates by clicking the blue  box at the left of the page.

Disclaimer:  YoungWilliams does not endorse the reports or opinions expressed by non-YoungWilliams authors, nor do we endorse the entities that initially released or published the materials posted on our website.

 

Research & Case Law

Ensuring Families Receive Child Support Payments

May 2022

The child support program was initially set up to recover benefits paid to families. Even though this mindset has changed, there are still policies in place to reimburse the federal government before child support goes to the family. This brief explores policies for pass through and disregard and distribution that will get money into the hands of the family. Research shows parents who know their support is going to their family are more likely to pay and more willing to establish paternity.

Noncustodial Parents and the GIG Economy

May 2022

Collecting child support from parents who work in the gig economy is difficult, and the number of parents working in the gig economy is increasing. This brief uses Census Bureau information to define the gig workforce and the number of noncustodial parents who are working in the gig economy. 

Centering Child Well-Being in Child Support Policy

May 2022

Child support policies should be designed to maximize child well-being. This brief, part of the Centering Child Well-Being in Child Support Policy series, examines policies to increase the child support that goes to families, remove barriers to payment, increase job retention, support father engagement, and encourage co-parenting.

McLane v. Goodwin-McLane (North Carolina 2022)

May 2022

An artificial insemination contract is valid as long as there is proper consideration. This case involves three people, a sperm donor, the recipient, and the other parent, plaintiff. The Plaintiff and the recipient, a same-sex couple, married and decided to have a child. The donor agreed to donate sperm. After the recipient became pregnant, the donor, the recipient, and the plaintiff, entered into a contract drafted by the donor. The parents separated after the child’s birth. The donor filed a legitimization action. The plaintiff filed a breach of contract action against the donor and the recipient, alleging donor had given up his right to raise the child as part of the contract.

Morris v. Morris (North Carolina)

April 2022

The prohibition against retroactive modifications doesn’t come into play if the child support order is temporary. In 2014, the parents filed for divorce and, in 2015, the court entered a temporary support order for the father to pay support, which it then suspended in a 2016 order. In 2020, the court entered a final order and calculated the father’s child support starting in 2016. The father appealed the final order, arguing the 2016 order suspending support became a permanent order by virtue of its duration and it was error to set support back to 2016.

Wallace v. Wallace (Mississippi 2022)

April 2022

Parents can’t unilaterally modify child support. The parents divorced in 2011, and the final divorce decree set out their visitation schedule and ordered the father to pay support. With time, the children alternated weeks with each parent. The father stopped paying support in 2017. In 2019, the mother filed to modify custody, support, for a finding of contempt for the father’s failure to pay support, and sought relief for other issues.

Smith v. Grant (North Carolina 2022)

April 2022

A child support order can’t be based on speculation. The parents appeared before the court to determine custody and child support for their child. Prior to hearing, the parents agreed on a joint legal custody and a visitation schedule but the trial court determined child support. The final order granted the mother primary physical custody of the child and calculated child support using Worksheet A, which is based on one parent having less than 123 night of visitation per year. 

Reconciling Remote Learning with Imputed Income for Custodial Parents

March 2022

Imputing income to custodial parents has become an issue during the pandemic. Many custodial parents left their jobs to care for children who were learning remotely. The author argues courts shouldn’t impute income under these circumstances. Instead, courts should exercise discretion and deviate from the guidelines or apply a good faith-best interests standard.

Procedural Justice in the Child Support Process Lessons from an Implementation Study of the Procedural Justice-Informed Alternatives to Contempt Demonstration

March 2022

The federal Office of Child Support Enforcement funded the Procedural Justice-Informed Alternatives to Contempt (PJAC) grant to fund projects which implemented the principles of procedural justice in working with parents facing contempt. This report analyzes implementation of the PJAC model. The model includes a case review, outreach and engagement, case conference, case action plan, and case management.

Procedural Justice in the Child Support Process An Implementation Guide

March 2022

Using lessons learned during the Procedural Justice-Informed Alternatives to Contempt (PJAC) grant, this guide provides child support agencies detailed instructions on how to implement procedural justice-informed practices. The PJAC grant funded projects designed to improve outcomes for parents who were on the verge of a contempt referral using the principles of procedural justice.

Pages