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

Vanderveer v. Vanderveer (Nebraska 2021)

September 2021

The definition of income for child support is purposefully broad. All income, unless specifically excluded, counts as long as it is regularly received for the foreseeable future. The parents, who had two children, filed for divorce. The father’s income consisted of a base salary, an annual bonus, and the proceeds from stock shares. He received stock shares from his employer annually. The shares vested in the future, and as they vested, the father cashed them and used them for household expenses. In the division of marital property, the trial court divided the stock grants received during the marriage that were not yet vested. The trial court excluded any stock proceeds from the father’s income for child support. The mother and father both appealed the final decree. 

Davis v. Henderson (Mississippi 2021)

September 2021

When reviewing a lower court’s decision to terminate child support due to the child’s extreme actions, the proper standard of review of abuse of discretion. The chancery court terminated a father’s obligation to support his child based on the child’s refusal to have contact with the father. The obligation was terminated until the child resumed visitation with the father. The court of appeals reversed, finding the father at fault for the deterioration of the relationship. The Supreme Court reversed, finding the appellate court didn’t apply the right standard of review. 

Snowden v. Jaure (Wyoming 2021)

September 2021

A parent who chooses not to work can be considered voluntarily underemployed. The father filed to modify support based on an increase in the mother’s income. In her financial affidavit, the mother represented she had no income. She testified she had worked in the oil and gas industry, had been laid off due to the pandemic, and was choosing to stay at home with her younger children. The trial court reduced her prior earnings by twenty five percent and imputed her at that amount. The father’s financial affidavit showed he only worked 20 hours per week.

Jefferson v. Jefferson (Mississippi 2021)

September 2021

Nontaxable federal payments for military members such as basic allowable housing (BAH), basic allowable subsistence (BAS), cost of living and a clothing allowance are income for child support. The parents filed for divorce. The father was a military member and received benefits on top of his regular salary including BAS, BAH, cost-of-living allowance, and clothing allowance. The father appealed, arguing these benefits should not be counted as income.

Toro v. Toro (Nebraska 2021)

September 2021

A trial court’s determination of income won’t be disturbed on appeal without a clear abuse of discretion. The parents filed for divorce. They had two children. The court had to calculate the father’s net monthly income for support. He worked construction and took side jobs for cash. He submitted his income tax returns for the last three years. The trial court used his 2019 tax return to calculate his monthly income and found the father has an earning capacity of $60,000. The father appealed, arguing the court should have averaged his income for the past three years.

Johnson v. Johnson (Nebraska 2021)

September 2021

For child support to be properly before the court, the pleading must contain the right language. The original divorce decree granted the parents shared custody of their two children and set child support at zero. The father filed to modify custody and support and the mother counterclaimed for a modification of custody and support consistent with the Nebraska guidelines. The final order found neither party met the burden to change custody. The mother filed to alter or amend the order requesting the court address a material change of circumstances with respect to support. Following a hearing, the trial court entered an order for father to pay the mother. The father appealed.

Sallae v. Omar (Nebraska 2021)

September 2021

A parent who seeks to modify a child support order must show a ten percent change in support, upward or downward, due to financial circumstances which have lasted three months and that will most likely continue for another six months. In this case, the initial support order required the father to pay monthly child support of $50. The mother filed to modify support citing the parties change in employment and income. Testimony showed the father had worked but was not working at the time of hearing. He testified he could only work 20 hours per week, and he suffered from sleeping issues and other ailments. He offered no supporting documentation. The mother was eligible for a raise, which meant the child no longer qualified for Medicaid. She was going to have to insure him through her employer-provided insurance.

Abney v. Pace (Tennessee 2021)

August 2021

If a parent provides  health insurance for a child on top of the court-ordered insurance, the cost must be a reasonable for the parent to receive credit for the premium. In the parent’s divorce decree, the father was ordered to pay support and provide health insurance. The father filed to modify support. The mother answered claiming the father had not provided her with proof of the insurance and she counterclaimed for contempt for failure to pay support.

O’Roake v. State of Wyoming, ex rel. Dept’ Family Svcs. (Wyoming 2021)

August 2021

Child support can continue beyond the age of majority if a child is mentally or physically disabled and incapable of self-support. The Department of Family Services filed extend support for a child beyond the age of the child’s majority due to the child’s diagnosis of a metabolic disorder. The court commissioner recommended modifying support, and the district approved the recommendation. The order continued support so long as the child was enrolled as a full-time college student. The father appealed.

Chalmers v. Burrough (Kansas 2021)

August 2021

A parent’s failure to comply with the registration procedure for UIFSA doesn’t deprive a district court of general subject matter jurisdiction over support orders. The father filed to register and modify a Florida support order in Kansas but failed to attach a copy of the original order, as required by statute. The court temporarily modified support. The mother filed to dismiss the action based on the father’s failure to comply with the registration procedure, arguing the court was without jurisdiction over the order.