State of Nebraska v. Bryan B and Monica D (Nebraska 2015)
A parent must prove cost of health insurance before being awarded a deduction for child support purposes.
Read MoreArtz v. Norris (Mississippi 2015)
Court of Appeals held finding of contempt against father was appropriate, father could not unilaterally modify court order and make child support payments directly to child without the court’s approval, and father was liable for his payment toward the child’s medical insurance premium even though mother’s new husband employer paid for the insurance.
Read MoreHayes v. Hayes
An upward deviation in child support without a specific finding to support the increase will be viewed as an abuse of discretion.
Read MoreHayes v. Hayes (Tennessee 2015)
If an obligor receives variable income, the income may be averaged over a reasonable period of time. Courts may make this determination on a case-by-case basis.
Read MoreMartin v. Phillips (Kansas 2015)
In a proceeding to collect arrears, apply the longer of the statute of limitations period between the issuing state and the forum state.
Read MoreLevene v. Levene (Wyoming 2014)
In making a determination of voluntary unemployment, the court shall consider: (A) Prior employment experience and history; (B) Educational level and whether additional education would make the parent more self-sufficient or significantly increase the parent’s income; (C) The presence of children of the marriage in the parent’s home and its impact on the earnings of…
Read MoreLevene v. Levene (Wyoming 2014)
In making a determination of voluntary unemployment, the court shall consider: (A) Prior employment experience and history; (B) Educational level and whether additional education would make the parent more self-sufficient or significantly increase the parent’s income; (C) The presence of children of the marriage in the parent’s home and its impact on the earnings of…
Read MoreLP v. LF (Wyoming 2014)
Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 14–2–504(a)(v) provides that a man is presumed to be the father of a child if: For the first two (2) years of the child’s life, he resided in the same household with the child and openly held out the child as his own. However, the statute only creates a presumption, which…
Read MoreBullock v. Bullock (Wyoming 2014)
A civil contempt order must be supported by clear and convincing evidence. Clear and convincing evidence is “evidence that would persuade a finder of fact that the truth of the contention is highly probable.” The elements of civil contempt are: “1) an effective court order that required certain conduct by the alleged contemnor; 2) the…
Read MoreMuir v. Kansas Health Policy Authority (Kansas 2014)
The Kansas Health Policy Authority did not erroneously interpret the law or act arbitrarily, capriciously, or unreasonably when it calculated a Medicaid recipient’s available income that could be used to pay the cost of medical care without first deducting amounts that the person had been ordered to pay in child support and maintenance.
Read MoreOrtiz v. Ortiz (Kansas 1956)
The marriage of a minor child does not automatically terminate the child support obligation of the minor.
Read MoreOrtiz v. Ortiz (Kansas 1956)
The marriage of a minor child does not automatically terminate the child support obligation of the minor.
Read MoreOrtiz v. Ortiz (Kansas 1956)
The marriage of a minor child does not automatically terminate the child support obligation of the minor.
Read MoreEdwards v. Edwards (Kansas 1958)
An order of temporary support, in a divorce action, is merely a temporary provision for a child’s support until the final determination of the divorce action. The order for temporary support does not become a final judgment of support.
Read MoreAndler v. Andler (Kansas 1975)
A parent is entitled to credit for Social Security payments by the government against his or her liability for child support under a divorce decree to the extent of, but not exceeding, his or her monthly obligation for child support.
Read MoreBrady v. Brady (Kansas 1979)
When a child attains the age of majority, or when a child goes to live with the other parent, or when a child dies, the obligation to pay support for that child should automatically cease and terminate unless an agreement provides otherwise.
Read MoreBrady v. Brady (Kansas 1979)
When a child attains the age of majority, or when a child goes to live with the other parent, or when a child dies, the obligation to pay support for that child should automatically cease and terminate unless an agreement provides otherwise.
Read MoreBrady v. Brady (Kansas 1979)
When a child attains the age of majority, or when a child goes to live with the other parent, or when a child dies, the obligation to pay support for that child should automatically cease and terminate unless an agreement provides otherwise.
Read MoreLittle v. Streater (Federal, US Supreme Court, 1981)
There is a due process right of an indigent, alleged father to obtain genetic testing at a state’s expense.
Read MoreMills v. Habluetzel (Federal, US Supreme Court 1982)
The period for ascertaining the fatherhood of the child must be sufficiently long to permit those who have an interest in the child to bring an action on their behalf despite the personal difficulties that may surround the birth of a child outside of wedlock.
Read MoreWhisler v. Whisler (Kansas 1984)
Parents cannot legally reduce or terminate a child support obligation by contractual agreement. That right is the child’s and can be reduced or terminated only by court order.
Read MoreUnited States v. Morton (Federal, US Supreme Court, 1984)
An employer is not liable for complying with an income withholding order appearing to be valid on in face from a foreign state tribunal.
Read MoreUnited States v. Morton (Federal, US Supreme Court, 1984)
An employer is not liable to a non-custodial parent for complying with an income withholding order appearing to be valid on its face from a state tribunal.
Read MoreSorenson v. Secretary of the Treasury (Federal, US Supreme Court, 1986)
An excess earned-income tax credit will be considered to be an “over-payment” to the Internal Revenue Service and therefore is eligible for a tax intercept by a state child support agency for satisfaction of owed child support payments.
Read MoreRose v. Rose (Federal, US Supreme Court, 1987)
Veteran’s Administration Disability payments are considered income and should be used for the satisfaction of child support obligations.
Read MoreRose v. Rose (Federal, US Supreme Court, 1987)
Veteran’s Administration Disability payments are considered income and should be used for the satisfaction of child support obligations.
Read MoreRose v. Rose (Federal, US Supreme Court, 1987)
A state court has jurisdiction to hold a disabled veteran in contempt for failing to pay child support, even if the veteran’s only means of satisfying his obligation is to use veteran’s benefits received as compensation for a service connected disability.
Read MoreRivera v. Minnich (Federal, US Supreme Court, 1987)
When paternity actions are brought in court, they are civil in nature. Thus the burden of proof is generally a preponderance of the evidence.
Read MoreHooks v. Hooks (Kansas 1988)
A valid judgment for child support arrearages may be collected and enforced in the same manner as any other final judgment.
Read MoreHicks v. Feiock (US 1988)
If both civil and criminal relief is imposed in the same action, then the criminal feature of the order is dominant and fixes its character a criminal for purposes of review and burdens of proof.
Read MoreClark v. Jeter (Federal, US Supreme Court, 1988)
The period for ascertaining the fatherhood of the child must be sufficiently long to permit those who have an interest in the child to bring an action on their behalf despite the personal difficulties that may surround the birth of a child outside of wedlock.
Read MoreIn re Marriage of Ross (Kansas 1989)
Prior to ordering a blood test to determine whether the presumed parent is the biological parent, the district court must consider the best interests of the child, including physical, mental, and emotional needs.
Read MoreIn re Marriage of Ross (Kansas 1989)
Prior to ordering a blood test to determine whether the presumed parent is the biological parent, the district court must consider the best interests of the child, including physical, mental, and emotional needs.
Read MoreIn re Marriage of Peak (Kansas 1989)
A child support obligation terminates “when a child goes to live with the other parent” is clarified and restricted to situations where a permanent change of residence is involved.
Read MoreIn re Marriage of Peak (Kansas 1989)
When a child goes to live with the other parent, but it is not a permanent change in custody, “abatement” is accepted as a court ordered modification.
Read MoreIn re Marriage of Peak (Kansas 1989)
A child support obligation terminates “when a child goes to live with the other parent” is clarified and restricted to situations where a permanent change of residence is involved.
Read MoreMichael H. v. Gerald D. (Federal, US Supreme Court, 1989)
Only a presumed father or mother may rebut a presumption of paternity.
Read MoreIn re Paternity of JRW and KB (Wyoming 1991)
While genetic testing may be necessary in a paternity action, the presumption of paternity can be effectively rebutted by the agreement of the parties.
Read MoreIn re Paternity of JRW and KB (Wyoming 1991)
Presumed fathers are barred from contesting parentage if they do not bring actions within a reasonable time and by the doctrines of res judicata, collateral estoppel, and judicial estoppel.
Read MoreState ex rel. Secretary of SRS v. Clear (Kansas 1991)
To terminate parental rights under Kansas law, voluntary relinquishment of parental rights and Kansas Department of Social and Rehabilitation Services’ acceptance of surrender of the child are required.
Read MoreState ex rel. Secretary of SRS v. Clear (Kansas 1991)
A child’s parent, parents, or guardian shall be liable to repay to the secretary of social and rehabilitation services any assistance expended on the child’s behalf, regardless of the specific program under which the assistance is or has been provided.
Read MoreJensen v. Runft (Kansas 1992)
The Uniform Parentage Act requires courts to act in the best interests of the child when imposing legal obligations or conferring legal rights on the mother/child relationship and the father/child relationship.
Read MoreIn re Adoption of RSC (Wyoming 1992)
An action to declare nonexistence of a presumptive father and child relationship until almost four years after all relevant facts are know will be time barred – not within a reasonable time.
Read MoreHasty v. Hasty (Wyoming 1992)
A trial court has the authority to deviate from guidelines by considering non-custodial parent’s support obligations to later born minor children of subsequent marriages.
Read MoreEllison v. Walter ex rel. Walter (Wyoming 1992)
A district court possesses the authority to issue support orders retroactive to the date of a child’s birth in paternity/support actions initiated by a state for the reimbursement of public assistance.
Read MoreDowdy v. Dowdy (Wyoming 1993)
Slight deviations from the guidelines without issuance of the proper findings does not require appellate courts to reverse and remand back to a district court.
Read MoreState ex rel. Hermesmann v. Seyer (Kansas 1993)
The issue of consent to sexual activity under the criminal statutes is irrelevant in a civil action to determine paternity and for support of a minor child born of such activity.
Read MoreIn re Marriage of Emerson (Kansas 1993)
Supplemental security income benefits being received by a minor child may not be considered in determining the presumptive child support due under the child support guidelines.
Read MoreIn re Marriage of Walje (Kansas 1994)
Where support is paid directly to custodial parent, rather than through the channels specified in the support order, the non-custodial parent who has not fully complied with the support order and will be found to be in arrearages.
Read MoreIn re Paternity of SDM (Wyoming 1994)
A child who has not been included as a party in any prior paternity case nor any prior divorce action cannot be foreclosed by the doctrines of res judicata, collateral estoppel, or judicial estoppel with respect to the child’s subsequent effort to achieve determination of paternity.
Read MoreIn re Marriage of Case (Kansas 1994)
Voluntary termination by a child support obligor from higher paid employment to accept lower paid employment is always suspect.
Read MoreIn re Marriage of Beacham (Kansas 1994)
Child support worksheets approved by the court shall be filed in every case where an order of child support is entered after the effective date of the Kansas Child Support Guidelines.
Read MoreSharpe v. Sharpe (Wyoming 1995)
The denial of visitation rights by either the custodial parent or the child does not constitute a change in circumstances justifying the reduction or termination of the non-custodial parent’s support obligation.
Read MoreScruggs v. Chandlee (Kansas 1995)
The child support guidelines provide that the non-custodial parent may deduct the amount of child support paid for those children from his or her gross income.
Read MoreScruggs v. Chandlee (Kansas 1995)
The child support guidelines provide that the non-custodial parent may deduct the amount of child support paid for those children from his or her gross income.
Read MoreIn re Marriage of Lewallen (Kansas 1995)
For the purposes of the Kansas Child Support Guidelines, a farmer is a self-employed person whose domestic gross income is that person’s gross income less those actual expenditures reasonably necessary for the production of income.
Read MoreIn re Marriage of Lewallen (Kansas 1995)
In determining child support obligations under the Kansas Child Support Guidelines, the taxable income shown in a tax return is not always a reliable indication of domestic gross income.
Read MoreIn re Marriage of Lewallen (Kansas 1995)
In determining domestic gross income of a farmer under the Kansas Child Support Guidelines, a total disregard of depreciation in farming operations is an abuse of discretion by a court.
Read MoreFlorida Dept. of HRS v. Breeden (Kansas 1995)
Where a paternity proceeding is initiated through an interstate support enforcement mechanism and the child resides in another state, the trial court should await a determination from the court of the initiating state that a blood test establishing paternity is in the best interests of the child before making its determination of paternity.
Read MoreThomas v. Thomas (Wyoming 1996)
The legislature intended the change in the age of majority to apply prospectively only and not to apply to an existing court decree such as a child support order.
Read MoreRocha v. Rocha (Wyoming 1996)
In a divorce action, a trial court has discretion in concluding that a father’s child support payments can or cannot offset the parties’ original property settlement.
Read MoreIn re Marriage of Patterson (Kansas 1996)
Although discretionary, the Kansas Child Support Guidelines extrapolation formula must be considered by the trial court when income exceeds the child support schedules.
Read MoreIn re Marriage of Patterson (Kansas 1996)
Although discretionary, the Kansas Child Support Guidelines extrapolation formula must be considered by the trial court when income exceeds the child support schedules. Child support worksheets approved by the court shall be filed in every case where an order of child support is entered.
Read MoreIn re Marriage of Patterson (Kansas 1996)
Statute gives the trial court the jurisdiction to modify child support and education provisions of minor children, even if they were provided for in a property settlement agreement.
Read MoreIn re Marriage of Patterson (Kansas 1996)
Statute gives the trial court the jurisdiction to modify child support and education provisions of minor children, even if they were provided for in a property settlement agreement. Departures from the child support guidelines must be explained by the trial court.
Read MoreIn re Marriage of Patterson (Kansas 1996)
The extrapolation formula contained in the Kansas Child Support Guidelines for income beyond the child support schedules is discretionary and does not establish a rebuttable presumption as to the level of appropriate support.
Read MoreIn re Marriage of Jones (Kansas 1996)
When a party neglects to assert a right or claim for an unreasonable and unexplained length of time and the lapse of time and other circumstances cause prejudice to the adverse party, relief is denied on the grounds of laches. The mere passage of time is not enough to invoke laches. The court must consider…
Read MoreJA v. CJH (Wyoming 1996)
Where no timely action has been instituted within 5 years of a child’s birth to declare the nonexistence of a father and child relationship, the statutory presumption of paternity becomes absolute, and any action to establish another’s paternity is foreclosed.
Read MoreIn re Support of Morgan (Kansas 1997)
Kansas requires a parent to repay all assistance provided on the child’s behalf, not some portion of that assistance determined by the district court.
Read MoreIn re Marriage of Johnson (Kansas 1997)
For child support computations, where a parent is paying for family health insurance that covers individuals from more than one family, the cost of the family coverage should be divided among the number of individuals who are covered by the insurance and that number should then be multiplied by the number of children subject to…
Read MoreIn re Marriage of Johnson (Kansas 1997)
Under the Kansas Child Support Guidelines, income may be imputed to the non-custodial parent if that parent is deliberately unemployed or underemployed.
Read MoreIn re Marriage of Johnson (Kansas 1997)
If a reasonable person could conclude that a parent is not deliberately unemployed or underemployed, it is not an abuse of discretion for the district court to refuse to impute the parent’s former income in calculating the child support obligation.
Read MoreHollingshead v. Hollingshead (Wyoming 1997)
In the absence of statute, a decree for periodic payments of child support creates sequential judgments enforceable under the statutory procedures for enforcement of judgments.
Read MoreState ex rel. Secretary of SRS v. Cunningham (Kansas 1997)
The legislature’s use of the word “assistance” in Kansas statute is intended to apply to all kinds of assistance, including medical assistance.
Read MoreBlessing v. Freestone (US 1997)
Title IV-D of the Social Security Act requiring that states operate their child support programs in “substantial compliance” with Title IV-D, does not give individuals federal right to force state agency to substantially comply with its provisions. The substantial compliance is merely a guide for Secretary of Health and Human Services to measure system wide…
Read MoreWood v. Wood (Wyoming 1998)
Individual is not voluntarily underemployed because (s)he voluntarily commits a crime, which limits their employment options, if evidence reveals that they make a good faith effort to find the highest paying job possible given their situation.
Read MoreIn re Marriage of Thurmond (Kansas 1998)
The Kansas Child Support Guidelines are the basis for establishing and reviewing child support orders in the district courts in Kansas. Judges and hearing officers must follow the guidelines. Child support obligations are calculated by completing the Child Support Worksheets.
Read MoreIn re Marriage of Thurmond (Kansas 1998)
The fact of incarceration, standing alone, is not legal justification for the suspension or modification of the parent’s child support obligation previously determined under the Kansas Child Support Guidelines.
Read MoreIn re Marriage of Scott (Kansas 1998)
Income withholding for purposes of enforcement of child support obligations is provided by Kansas statute.
Read MoreState ex rel. Secretary of SRS v. Mayfield (Kansas 1998)
In an action to establish an order for support of the child, failure to join any person as a party shall not deprive the court of jurisdiction to determine whether a party to the action has a duty to support the child and, if so, to enter an order for support.
Read MoreState ex rel. Secretary of SRS v. Mayfield (Kansas 1998)
In an action to establish an order for support of the child, failure to join any person as a party shall not deprive the court of jurisdiction to determine whether a party to the action has a duty to support the child and, if so, to enter an order for support.
Read MoreRupp v. Grubb (Kansas 1998)
Where a parent is incarcerated in a correctional facility, the fact of incarceration, standing alone, is not legal justification for the suspension or modification of the parent’s child support obligation previously determined under the Kansas Child Support Guidelines.
Read MoreRupp v. Grubb (Kansas 1998)
Where a parent is incarcerated in a correctional facility, the fact of incarceration, standing alone, is not legal justification for the suspension or modification of the parent’s child support obligation previously determined under the Kansas Child Support Guidelines.
Read MoreState ex rel. Secretary of SRS v. Miller (Kansas 1998)
When a child is born out of wedlock and no credible evidence exists that the child has a presumed father, the trial court may order genetic testing in a paternity action without first conducting a best interest hearing (Ross hearing), which is to determine whether the testing would be in the best interests of the…
Read MoreState ex rel. Secretary of SRS v. Miller (Kansas 1998)
When a child is born out of wedlock and no credible evidence exists that the child has a presumed father, the trial court may order genetic testing in a paternity action without first conducting a best interest hearing (Ross hearing), which is to determine whether the testing would be in the best interests of the…
Read MoreState ex rel. Secretary of SRS v. Miller (Kansas 1998)
When a child is born out of wedlock and no credible evidence exists that the child has a presumed father, the trial court may order genetic testing in a paternity action without first conducting a best interest hearing (Ross hearing), which is to determine whether the testing would be in the best interests of the…
Read MoreIn re Paternity of IC (Wyoming 1999)
A court has the authority to deviate a child support obligation downward based on insurance and travel costs.
Read MoreGentzel v. Williams (Kansas 1998)
The Uniform Interstate Family Support Act provides statutory jurisdiction in the district courts to modify a child support order of another state.
Read MoreGentzel v. Williams (Kansas 1998)
Provisions of the Uniform Interstate Family Support Act, the Interstate Income Withholding Act, and the Full Faith and Credit for Child Support Orders Act are applied to the facts of each case.
Read MoreTL v. CS (Wyoming 1999)
A presumptive father must provide clear and convincing evidence to meet his burden of proving the results of genetic test favoring another man are inaccurate or somehow deficient.
Read MoreRoseman v. Sackett (Wyoming 1999)
A non-custodial parent has the responsibility of showing that business deductions are reasonable and appropriate.
Read MoreIn re Paternity of IC (Wyoming 1999)
Where mother voluntarily leaves employment to become a full-time student, a district court can reasonably find she is voluntarily unemployed, and can impute her income from prior years.
Read MoreFleenor v. Fleenor (Wyoming 1999)
The principal portion of a business mortgage payment may be deductible if, in its discretion, the district court determines that the payment reasonably and legitimately reduces net income for child support purposes.
Read MoreAhearn v. Ahearn (Wyoming 1999)
The amount withheld from a father’s pay for deferred compensation is not income under the child support guidelines, because deferred compensation is not a “payment or return in money or in kind” to the father when it is paid into a fund for his later benefit.
Read MoreIn re Marriage of Schoby (Kansas 2000)
The marriage of a minor is not a “terminating event” which automatically allows a payor parent to stop making child support payments for that child.
Read MoreIn re Marriage of Schoby (Kansas 2000)
The marriage of a minor is not a “terminating event” which automatically allows a payor parent to stop making child support payments for that child.
Read MoreIn re Marriage of Schoby (Kansas 2000)
Child support may be modified at any time circumstances render such a change proper, but the modification operates prospectively only.
Read MoreFerguson v. Winston (Kansas 2000)
Prior to ordering a blood test to determine whether the presumed parent is the biological parent, the trial court must consider the best interests of the child, including physical, mental, and emotional needs (Ross Hearing).
Read MoreWhitt v. State ex rel. Wright (Wyoming 2001)
In establishing the amount of back child support owed, a state must determine the actual income of both parents for the time period at issue, or the state must have a factual basis to support that any imputation of income was reasonable over the time periods at issue.
Read MoreIn re Marriage of Kasper (Kansas 2001)
In situations where parents have divided custody of two children, a child support worksheet must be completed for each child.
Read More