Mills 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 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)
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 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 MoreMichael H. v. Gerald D. (Federal, US Supreme Court, 1989)
Only a presumed father or mother may rebut a presumption of paternity.
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 MoreTurner v. Rogers (Federal, US Supreme Court, 2011)
The state does not necessarily need to provide counsel to an unrepresented non-custodial parent if the state has procedural safeguards in place. Those safeguards include (1) notice to the defendant that his ability to pay is a critical issue in the contempt proceeding; (2) the use of a form or the equivalent to elicit relevant…
Read MoreMaley v. State of Kansas (Kansas 2013)
A grievance based on the garnishment of social security disability benefits by the Kansas Child Support Collection Division is meritless.
Read More