child support

What will happen if the NFL Lockout continues? What happens to pending child support cases involving NFL players? What happens to the players who are paying thousands for child support but now have little or no income? Time will tell, but it is my guess that the longer it drags on, the more likely it will be that there will be child support reductions, significant reductions.

Awards based on earnings of several million dollars per year must now be adjusted to reflect earnings of a few thousand dollars per year. Is it worth it to a player to seek a reduction today? Maybe, but as the Lockout continues and the income remains at zero or close, players will have to reduce their expenses, including child support. Will the courts concur? Only time will tell, but the longer it goes, the longer players remain unemployed, the more likely it is that they will see their child support obligations reduced, in my opinion.

The ABA has long pursued the concept of “Civil Gideon” which, loosely defined, means the right to a lawyer in civil cases (Gideon v. Wainwright was, of course, the case that guaranteed the right to counsel for criminal defendants). At the ABA Annual meeting in San Francisco in August, 2010, the resolution passed.

This week the Fulton County Daily Report published an article about a lawsuit in Georgia which attempts to guarantee the right to counsel for certain civil defendants, particularly those at risk of incarceration for failue to pay child support.

What a dilemma? While states such as Georgia are struggling to find funding to provide lawyers for defendants in criminal cases, there are now lawsuits being filed, such as the one referenced above, to require funding for lawyers for defendants in civil cases. The goal is noble and well intentioned, but the potential pitfalls are numerous. For instance, why should only the defendant receive such assistance? Perhaps the plaintiff who may be filing to receive support is even more worthy of the public’s assistance?

The beauty of America is that we can have this debate. While aspirational goals are great, when there is only so much funding available, sometimes aspirations must yield to practicality. It will be interesting to see where this case goes.

About a year ago, we represented an NFL footlball player in a matter where he had been ordered to fund a trust, in case he missed child support payments. The trust was a sort of collateral. That trust was upheld by the Georgia Supreme Court and this week, they have upheld a payment of “lump sum child support”. The case is Mullin v. Mullin.

While the goal of ensuring the child’s best interest is always paramount, this case presents a few complications (all of which are resolved in favor of allowing the award, since it is in the child’s best interests). Some of those concerns are that should circumstances change, the usual course would be for one party to seek a modification of the monthly payments. But in this case, the payments will have already been made. What if the child moves in with the paying parent one day, or with his relatives? Mother has already received hundreds of thousands of dollars, and then there may be no money left for the new caretaker(s) of the child.

While there are many interesting legal angles, it is hard to be upset with a court sytem that seems to err on the side of protecting children. After all, if the parents are fighting with each other, shouldn’t the court be the one voice that speaks first and foremost for the children?

There are hundreds if not thousands of horror stories about international custody/kidnapping and support. This entry will not cover the Sean Goldman case or many of the other ones recently in the news, but I decided to write this post when I read an article about a man in Germany who has finally been relieved of paying child support for a child wrongfully taken from him, 10 years ago.

While getting off the hook for child support may be a relief, the big issue of retrieving an unlawfully removed child still remains. This is an issue that not only causes much pain and suffering for children and their parents, but also haunts many family law attorneys who have been unable to effectuate the release or return of a client’s wrongfully taken child. During my year as Chair of the Family Law Section of the American Bar Association I intend to work on this issue and shine more light on this problem. There are International Laws, but not every country has agreed to them, and the rules are not applied uniformly and consistently. Educating our politicians is one good way to start and I hope the ABA can help in that regard and others.

For those of you who are lawyers practicing in Georgia, we will try to address this issue at our annual Family Law Institute which I urge you to attend next Spring. On a national level, we will try to also address it at future Continuing Legal Education Seminars throughout the country. These cases are so important and time passes so fast that unless we as family law attorneys understand the rules and laws, children may go unreturned for too long, and in many cases they may never be returned. We must all be diligent, as citizens, and those of us in the legal business, must remain educated and up to date on this issue and the rules and laws in this area.

On January 1, 2007, Georgia’s most recent child support guidelines and related calculators went into effect.  While there are child support guidelines in Georgia, there are no alimony guidelines, but rather factors that the finder of fact shall consider.

According to O.C.G.A. 19-6-5, the finder of fact shall consider the following factors when determining the amount of alimony, if any, to be awarded:

(1) The standard of living established during the marriage;

(2) The duration of the marriage;

(3) The age and the physical and emotional condition of both parties;

(4) The financial resources of each party;

(5) Where applicable, the time necessary for either party to acquire sufficient education or training to enable him to find appropriate employment;

(6) The contribution of each party to the marriage, including, but not limited to, services rendered in homemaking, child care, education, and career building of the other party;

(7) The condition of the parties, including the separate estate, earning capacity, and fixed liabilities of the parties; and

(8) Such other relevant factors as the court deems equitable and proper.

Given these factors, and especially in light of the last factor, the dilemma may arise as to the predictability of how much alimony, if any, shall be paid and for how long.  Different courts in separate counties may result in very disparate alimony awards.  Attorneys experienced in family law can often predict what the likely result will be, but the lack of consistency between courts may give some parties the perception of an unfair result.  Of course, when a case involves unrepresented parties or attorneys unfamiliar with family law or lacking experience in front of the assigned judge, the lack of familiarity and/or experience may result in very different views on alimony, which in turn can become a roadblock to settlement.

So should Georgia adopt alimony guidelines and formulas similar to other states?  Would such an approach give more predictability, consistency, and a sense of fairness to alimony awards?

Or would such guidelines and formulas unnecessarily restrict judges and limit their abilities to judge each unique case on its own specific merits?   Would formulas have the unintended consequence of making judges akin to a computer that just displays a number?

There are pros and cons to both approaches.  Nevertheless, it is prudent for a party to at least consult with an attorney who is experienced in family law so that the party can ascertain his or her rights and potential obligations as they relate to alimony, whether or not the law provides for a “factors” or “guidelines” approach.