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.
Kaiser v. Kaiser (North Carolina 2018)
Findings must support a court’s determination of an asset as income for child support purposes. The mother and the father were divorced, and the trial court set child support.
Hewitt v. Hewitt (North Carolina 2018)
Competent evidence must support the finding of income for child support purposes. A parent should receive credit for maintaining health insurance for the children.
In re Biehl (Kansas 2018)
A paternity order may not be final for appellate purposes if it doesn’t address child support and other matters incident to the paternity establishment. The mother in this case appealed the denial of her motion to set aside a journal entry to paternity.
In re Marriage of Hou and Chu (Kansas 2018)
A court can deviate from the amount of presumptive support as long as findings support the reason for deviation. The divorce decree in this case ordered the father to pay child support, plus half of the children’s extracurricular activities.
Hance v. Hance (Tennessee 2018)
The juvenile court has exclusive original jurisdiction over dependency and neglect proceedings including child support. If there is also an open action in chancery court, the jurisdiction of the chancery court is suspended. The mother and father in this case divorced in chancery court.
DeFacto Parent and Non Parent Child Support Orders
Recently, state laws have recognized this parental right of “care, custody, and control” to opposite sex unmarried couples who bore the child of sex. Even more recently, state laws have recognized this parental right for those who did not engage in sexual intercourse leading to a pregnancy and birth. State laws have also increasingly limited this childcare right of traditionally recognized parents by allowing nonparents to secure court-ordered childcare over the objections of current parents, whether by recognizing these nonparents as de facto parents or as third parties with childcare standing. While state childcare law opportunities have evolved significantly as family structures, genetic testing, and assisted reproduction techniques have changed, the laws on parental and nonparental child support have not changed much. This article explores actual and potential child support laws arising from the new childcare laws for both parents and nonparents.
Madigan v. Madigan (North Carolina 2018)
Income for child support purposes is normally based on a parent’s actual income but it can be imputed to a parent if the evidence shows the parent isn’t earning up to his or her earning potential.
McCullough v. McCullough (Nebraska 2018)
A parent must make child support payments even if a modification is pending. The father appealed a district court order finding him in contempt for failure to pay child support.
Goodrich v. Goodrich (Tennessee 2018)
For child support purposes, a court can impute income to a parent that is higher than the parent’s actual income. The father appealed the district court order finding him underemployed and imputing income to him.
Calleja v. Calleja (Nebraska 2018)
A court may use actual income, not earning capacity, for child support purposes even when a parent makes a job change and the new job results in less income. The father, a tile installer, left a job to start his own business. As a result, his income decreased.