support

So the NFL Lockout may begin at midnight (see story by clicking here)? What does that mean for players who pay child support (and mothers who receive child support)? In the short term, it probably doesn’t mean much. But if the lockout lasts a while, there could be some real child support consequences. The first obvious consequence is that players may not have the cash flow to remain current on their child support obligations. Hopefully they choose correctly and pay child support before some of their other ongoing expenses (car payments, etc.). Not only should child support be at the top of the list, judges who have the power to incarcerate child support obligors may be much less sympathetic to the NFL player who was paid millions and did not save for this “rainy day”.

The next concern is litigation, two types. The first type of cases that will be brought may be the ones seeking to enforce court orders against those who have stopped or slowed their payments. The second is the actions to be filed by players to seek a reduction (temporary or permanent) of their support obligations. While courts may or may not be sympathetic, such lawsuits at least show the court that the player is not ignoring the obligation, but instead is trying to make it reflect his current financial situation. Of course lawsuits cost money so before a player files, he must feel that the work stoppage will not be short-lived.

The third, and best course of action, is for players and the women to whom they pay support, get together and reach agreements. In this way, there could be an agreed upon temporary reduction. If the player is ultimately reimbursed the full salary, then child support would be fully reimbursed. Or once the situation is resolved, there could be renewed discussions and possible agreements prior to running to court. Of course, if there is no season, players should have (and spend) more time with their children. This can also be agreed upon instead of litigated.

But the best suggestion is communication. Child support obligors and recipients should always communicate. Communication, good, effective communication is almost always the best first step to resolution. It’s what we encourage at KSS Family Law, and what we hope all attorneys, advisors and counselors do.

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?

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.