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

Employment Effects of the Earned Income Tax Credit: Taking the Long View

October 2020

The Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) is tax credit meant to lift families out of poverty. It provides a tax credit to workers based on earnings and household size. Since its inception in 1975, it has been expanded five times. This paper examines each individual expansion in depth and studies the expansions as a group to determine the effect of the EITC on labor supply.

Sommer v. Sommer (Nebraska 2020)

October 2020

Child support payments should be set according to the guidelines. A deviation is appropriate if application of the guidelines is unjust or inappropriate. In this modification action, the mother appealed the court’s order requiring her to pay child support. She argued husband’s trial testimony showed he agreed to a downward deviation so that she wouldn’t have to pay support. The appellate court affirmed the child support award.

Bilderback-Vess v. Vess (Nebraska 2020)

October 2020

A finding of contempt in a child support case requires willful disobedience, which is a factual determination. It must be impossible for a parent to pay support. The district court found the father in contempt for failure to child support and alimony. The father’s business failed, and he stopped making support payments. A portion of the support was paid through his military retirement. The father appealed arguing that he did not have assets sufficient to cover his child support and alimony.

State v. Sands (Kansas 2020)

October 2020

A motion to set aside a default judgment of paternity must be filed within a reasonable time. In 2014, a default paternity order established the father’s support obligation. He notified the district court of his intent to have the order set aside but never filed anything. He paid a small amount of support before he died in 2017. His Estate filed a motion to set aside the paternity judgment. The district court denied the motion finding that it wasn’t filed in a reasonable amount of time.

In re Marriage of Gronlie (Kansas 2020)

October 2020

Orders modifying child support are retroactive to the first day of the month following the filing of the motion to modify. The terms of the parents’ divorce decree set support for two children at a base amount and ordered the father to pay an additional percentage of his income if he earned more than $400,000. The older child emancipated and a new income withholding order was issued for half the base support amount. The father continued to pay the additional percentage of his income. The mother filed to modify support. The trial court recalculated support and set the effective date as the month following the filing of the petition.

In re Lask (Kansas 2020)

October 2020

The terms of the order will control what is considered an uninsured medical expense. These parents were operating under the terms of a modified divorce decree which divided uninsured medical expenses proportionately between them. The father, who earned significantly more, paid the bigger share. A child incurred significant bills due to stays in treatment. The mother filed for contempt alleging that the father had failed to pay his portion of uninsured medical expenses.

Working Toward a Resolution Facilitating Dialogue Between Parents Using Principles of Procedural Justice

September 2020

The federal Office of Child Support Enforcement (OCSE) funded the Procedural Justice Alternatives to Contempt (PJAC) grant to explore the application of procedural justice principles to enforcing child support orders. The grant targets noncustodial parents who are about to be referred for contempt. This brief explores the use of case conferences to develop a case action plan that identifies barriers and solutions.

Baumann v. Baumann (Mississippi 2020)

September 2020

A parent must plead for child support. This puts the other parent on notice of the support claim. In this case, the final divorce decree ordered the father to pay back child support starting January 2015. The father filed a motion for new trial or, alternatively to amend the judgment with respect to the back child support as well as other custody issues. Specific to the child support, the trial court denied the motion but changed the start date for the back support to April 2015. The father appealed.

In the Matter of the Paternity of AAE, TE v. Wy. Dep’t of Family Services (Wyoming 2020)

September 2020

A nonparty has no standing to participate in an action. A court can’t deny a petition to establish paternity once a genetic test is completed and the results meet the statutory threshold. The Wyoming Department of Family Services (DFS) filed to terminate the parental rights of the mother, the child’s presumed father, and the child’s biological father. The mother and the presumed father relinquished their rights. The biological father filed a petition to establish paternity in the termination action. DFS filed a motion to strike this petition, arguing that DFS wasn’t an appropriate party to the paternity action.

In re Marriage of Poggi (Kansas 2020)

September 2020

A district court’s decision has the discretion to apply the extended income formula for child support and findings are not required. In this high-income case, there were three child support orders: temporary, final judgement, and in a post-trial memorandum order. In the final judgment, the district court calculated support using the extended income formula and recalculated the temporary support based on the evidence presented at trial. The father filed a post-trial motion to modify support. In the memorandum order, the district court modified support based on evidence presented during the post-trial hearing and gave the father credit for direct expenses even though he hadn’t made a specific request. The father appealed, and the mother cross-appealed. 

Pages