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

Pinnacol v. Laughlin (Colorado)

January 2023

For child support funds to be exempt from garnishment, the account into which they are deposited must comply with the provisions of the Colorado Uniform Transfer to Minors Act. When social security funds are comingled with other money, only the amount of funds that is clearly traceable to social security is exempt from garnishment. The parent in this case was awarded Social Security Disability. His employer had provided temporary disability during the award period and sought reimbursement. When the judgment wasn’t paid, the employer began garnishment proceedings. The parent argued his funds were exempt.

In re Pretz (Kansas 2023)

January 2023

Under the law of the case, a motion to modify support can’t be used to relitigate issues already decided by the court in a previous stage of the case. The district court granted the father’s motion to modify child support. The mother did not appeal this order.

Gyger v. Clement (North Carolina 2022)

December 2022

Under the Hague Convention, the  respondent parent must have minimum contacts with a country for the country to have jurisdiction to enter a child support order. Switzerland, on behalf of mother, requested North Carolina register a Swiss child support order for enforcement. The father argued the Swiss Court had no personal jurisdiction over him, which is required as part of the Hague Convention. The North Carolina district court agreed. It found the father hadn’t received the required notice and opportunity to be heard. The mother appealed.

Price v. Price (North Carolina 2022)

December 2022

Evidence must support the determination of a parent’s income. Income determinations will be reviewed de novo. The father appealed the final order in this modification action, arguing that he had no notice of the hearing and that the trial court erred in calculating his income. The father failed to appear at the hearing. To calculate the father’s income, the mother presented the father’s W-2 form with his annual wages, evidence of his receipt of short-term disability payments, and income from a business. The appellate court found he had proper notice of the hearing but that the evidence didn’t support the income determination.

In re Parentage of MF (Kansas 2022)

December 2022

In this ongoing parentage case, the Kansas Court of Appeals upheld a district court’s determination that a birth parent successfully rebutted a presumption of the appellant’s parentage. The case was heard on remand from the Kansas Supreme Court, who sent it back for the district court to apply the proper parentage test. First, the party who wishes to be declared a legal parent must satisfy one of the statutory presumptions in K.S.A. 23-2208(a). If the presumption is established, then the other party must rebut it by clear and convincing evidence, by court decree establishing paternity of someone else, or an application of the test for competing presumptions. If the presumption is rebutted, the burden shifts back to the other party to prove the existence of a parent-child relationship by a preponderance of the evidence.

Hornsby v. Hornsby (Mississippi 2022)

December 2022

A parent requesting a modification based on a reduction in income must show a corresponding change in his or her lifestyle. The father, a self-employed lawyer, requested a modification of child support. The chancery court denied his request. The father appealed. The appellate court affirmed. The father argued the chancery court improperly granted a motion in limine that excluded relevant evidence. However, the father made no proffer of evidence during the trial and, on appeal, failed to specify any specific evidence that was excluded.

Temporary Assistance for Needy Families: Sanctioning and Child Support Compliance Among Black Families in Illinois

December 2022

The Temporary Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) block grant provides eligible families with cash assistance in return for compliance with specific requirements, such as cooperating with the child support program. This article reports on research done in the state of Illinois regarding policies around the receipt of TANF and the barriers to maintaining this benefit. The research found these policies create barriers that disproportionally affect families on the basis of their race.

Barham v. Barham (North Carolina 2022)

December 2022

A parent can’t unilaterally  modify a child support order. The original divorce decree ordered the father to pay support for the parties’ eight children. Support was modified several times. After entry of the latest modification, the father began paying one cent per pay period toward monthly support. He filed for credit for overpaying support, arguing he had made two additional child support payments each year for the years spanning 2013 -2019. The mother filed a motion for contempt for nonpayment. The trial court found the father in contempt.

Hoard v. Barrom (Tennessee 2022)

December 2022

 A court is without jurisdiction to modify a support order once a child has emancipated. The state of Tennessee petitioned to modify the father’s support order. The child turned 18 the following month. The trial court modified the order. A year later, the father moved to set aside the order, arguing the trial court had no jurisdiction to modify since the child had turned 18 and graduated from high school before order entry. The court denied the motion to set aside. The father appealed. The appellate court vacated the support order.

Marcel v. Marcel (Tennessee 2022)

November 2022

To calculate child support income for a parent with variable income (wages, bonus, overtime), the trial court should consider income over a period of time which will account for the variable income. In this case, the father worked at a plant and his income varied. He earned wages, bonuses, overtime, and double time. To calculate his income for child support, the trial court used his last four paystubs, which didn’t include any of this income. However, the information on the pay stub indicated that this type of income had been received year-to-date. The mother appealed the child support term of the final order.