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

Britt and Wake County Human Services, Child Support Enf., Intervenor, v. Britt (North Carolina 2022)

July 2022

A parent must provide the requisite proof in order for business expenses deducted from gross income. The parents filed for divorce. The father was self-employed and owned rental properties. During the trial, the father provided testimony as to his income, bank accounts, deposits into the bank accounts, and current work situation In weighing the evidence to determine the father’s income for child support, the trial court found the father’s testimony evasive and unreliable. The trial court used evidence of monthly deposits into his bank accounts to set his income and calculated support according to the guidelines.

Kubica v. Morgan (North Carolina 2022)

July 2022

A court has jurisdiction to hear a claim for child support within a child custody proceeding. The father filed to modify custody. The modified order granted primary physical custody to the mother. She then filed a motion to modify child support. The father filed to dismiss the motion, arguing the court had no jurisdiction to hear child support within a custody proceeding. The trial court denied the motion. The father appealed, arguing the trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the child support issue.

Carroll v. State ex rel. Dep’t of Family Services, Child Support Enforcement (Wyoming 2022)

July 2022

To set aside an order, there must be unusual circumstances. The child support order at issue in this case was set in 2012. The father was ordered to pay $50 per month, the statutory minimum. The father challenged the statute setting the statutory minimum as unconstitutional several times but was unsuccessful. In the latest legal action, the District Court modified the support order to $0 and entered a judgment for his arrears. The District Court denied his motion to set aside the order.

Nakauchi v. Cowart (Colorado 2022)

July 2022

Due process requires parents in direct pay cases receive advance notice of the entry of an income withholding order (IWO) for future child support payments. The mother, who paid her child support directly, filed suit against the county for violating her right to due process when it sent her employer an IWO without notice. The trial court agreed and entered a state-wide injunction requiring notice to obligors concurrently with the entry of an IWO for future support. The Mother appealed, arguing concurrent notice was inadequate to protect her rights. The County also appealed, arguing the injunction was unnecessary.

Bossian v. Bossian (North Carolina 2022)

July 2022

Parents can’t unilaterally modify child support orders. A parent is required to comply with the order even if it contains clerical errors. The father was found in contempt for failure to pay support. The final order included a purge payment and date for compliance. The mother filed a motion to correct clerical errors in the contempt order, and father filed a motion to for relief from the contempt order. The trial court granted the mother’s motion and denied the father’s motion. The trial court entered an arrest order but lowered the purge payment so the father could be quickly released.

Exploring the Long-Term Effects of Child Support

June 2022

This paper studies the long-term effects of the receipt of child support, specifically the impacts on recipients earning capacity, employability, receipt of benefits, and participation in the child support program as adults. The study supports the proposition that the receipt of child support helps adults overcome economic disadvantage by increasing earnings and employability. The study results support policies such as right sized orders, which promote regular payment of support and underscore the importance of payments. 

A Comparison of Approaches Informed by Procedural Justice and Traditional Enforcement in the Procedural Justice-Informed Alternatives to Contempt Demonstration

June 2022

The federal Office of Child Support Enforcement funded the Procedural Justice-Informed Alternatives to Contempt (PJAC) grant to explore the use of the principles of procedural justice during enforcement with the intent of improving the regular receipt of child support payments. Parents in the selected agencies were randomly assigned to one of two groups: one receiving PJAC services and one that applied traditional enforcement methods. This report compares the experiences of these two groups.

Robinson v. Robinson (Tennessee 2022)

June 2022

To find a parent voluntarily unemployed, the court must consider the parent’s choices and the reasonableness of the choices considering a parent’s obligation to support the child. The parents filed for divorce. They owned three Subway stores. Pending the final order, the court ordered that the mother would manage the stores and the father was to find another job. The father failed to find a job, so when calculating child support, the trial court imputed income to him that equaled the income for a Subway store manager. The father appealed, arguing the trial court had to first find him voluntarily unemployed before imputing income.

Hollis v. Hollis (Tennessee 2022)

June 2022

The definition of income is broad and all-encompassing. A reasonable necessity standard is applied to child support awards when the parents earn more than $10,000 per month. The parents of two special needs children filed for divorce.  The husband, a financial advisor, was the primary source of income for the family. His income included a loan from his employer, which was tied to performance goals. The loan was forgiven as he met the goals. As his income exceeded $10,000 per month, the trial court had to consider the reasonable necessity standard when awarding support above the guidelines. In its final order, the trial court found support should be set above the guideline amount in light of the father’s income and the children’s extensive special needs. Both parents appealed the final order.

Kelley v. Zitzelberger (Mississippi 2022)

June 2022

To modify a child support order, a parent must show a material change of circumstances that was unforeseen at the time of the original order. The father retired from the military and requested a modification of child support. The parents had orally agreed to reduce support and that the father would pay for certain expenses. The father wanted to offset the expenses with his arrears. The chancery court denied his request and entered a judgment for arrears. The appellate court affirmed.

Pages