Washington lawyers (child support) what do you think?

starlifter1 · 01-04-2010, 05:47 PM

I live in washington and pay child support.
My Ex-wife kicked my 18yo daughter out of their house in May of last year (they live in Kansas)
She told me she would stop child support but never did
My ex divorced her husband and moved back to Washington over mothers day in May.
May june july my daughter received no support
now my ex gives here the money I pay in child support.

Since my daughter no longer resides with my Ex-wife, legally would I still be required to pay support?

Dueller · 01-04-2010, 05:50 PM

Depends...is the child emancipated and self supporting?

BTW your ex's marital status has absolutely no relevance.

starlifter1 · 01-04-2010, 06:11 PM

The child will be 19 in march so I don't know if emancipated applies, she does as she pleases? and no she is not self supporting.

starlifter1 · 01-04-2010, 06:13 PM

Does the fact that the "child (19yo)" lives in kansas and the mother lives in Washington Make any difference?

Dueller · 01-04-2010, 06:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by starlifter1

Does the fact that the "child (19yo)" lives in kansas and the mother lives in Washington Make any difference?

Where is the court order from? WA or KS? That would be the court with current jurisdiction. What does the support order say (i.e., until age 18, 19 21, completes college?)

Keep in mind you may still be obligated until a court of competent jurisdiction says you aren't....generally CS vests once a month is complete. Until you are relieved of the obligation you still owe it and usually you can't stop it retroactively.

jhynesrockmtn · 01-04-2010, 06:22 PM

In WA the standard as per my divorce decree was the latter of the child turning 18 or graduating high school. One down, one to go. You need to look at your paperwork.

starlifter1 · 01-04-2010, 06:30 PM

The order says age 18 or completion of high school (Washington support enforcement) she does not always go to school and has failed a few classes and there is a possibility she will be attending school next year?
Would she be considered emancipated?
She refused to move back to washington.

Dueller · 01-04-2010, 06:37 PM

Where is she living? With whom? What exactly does the order say? Age 18 or completes high school, whichever comes first? Or last?

starlifter1 · 01-04-2010, 06:58 PM

She lives with friends from High school. she moved out of her last "friends" house a month ago and is living with a new friend.
Whichever comes last

Dueller · 07:12 PM

Is she enrolled in school? What grade is she (was she) in? I'd file a petition with court in WA requesting modification/termination of support if she is not actively pursuing a high school diploma. There are forms online you can use.

http://www.courts.wa.gov/forms/

starlifter1 · 01-04-2010, 07:35 PM

She is actively pursuing a high school diploma (Senior). My ***** is not child support for the next 5 months, Its what comes next? should her mother pay "her" portion of the child support?

Dueller · 07:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by starlifter1

She is actively pursuing a high school diploma (Senior). My ***** is not child support for the next 5 months, Its what comes next? should her mother pay "her" portion of the child support?

I would then send it to the child with a copy to wife. You'll have to make the call as to what to do about making wife pay. Likely wouldn't reduce your obligation if I hadda guess. If child were living with you it might be a bit dfferent.

flatbutt · 01-05-2010, 05:34 AM

When my kids turned 18 I paid support directly to them as long as they were in college. My court agreement said I'd pay to their mother if they lived with her and went to school but they stayed on campus. If she is not living with her Mom but is not in school then you'd likely not need to pay BUT it is all in the court order.

drcoastline · 06:21 AM

Starlifter,

So if I am reading your post correctly, you live in WA your Ex moved back to WA and your 18yr old daughter lives and is a KY resident?

Q#1 What state has has jurisdiction? WA or KY? Was the original order in WA and your EX moved to KY at a later date? Did she ever file for a change of venue in order to move jurisdiction to KY?

In NJ the support order is an order compelling the Alternate Parent to support the child. I am assuming your Ex is primary? If WA or KY are the same as NJ your wife does not have an order of obligation to pay support only you do. She can do what ever she pleases without ramification.

If you and your EX are on good terms you or she can file a motion with the court to modify the order. Emancipate the child, amend support and so forth. Even if you are not on good terms you can still file an order to amend the order. Being on good terms with the EX will make it easier to amend as she hopefully wont oppose you in court she will support you? Part of your argument will be your EX no longer supports her as she is in WA.

drcoastline · 01-05-2010, 06:28 AM

Oh and the short answer to your question,

"legally would I still be required to pay support?"

is YES. You are legally required to pay support until you are legally not required to pay support. That will only happen when the court vacates the order. Even if both of the requirements in your order are met she turns 18 or finishes high school the order does not just die. It must be vacated by the court.

Stop paying even if your wife says it's OK and the state will come looking for you. Your daughter is a ward of the state.

Dueller · 06:40 AM

drC...as I understand the OP he and ex are in WA, child living in Kansas while completing HS (5 mos to go). WA court order. Child is not fully self-supporting per OP. I think there is some confusion about CS...it is for non-custodial parent's share of the support. Since both are non-custodial if modified the Court would likely order support until child has graduated from HS (to the extent its consistent with its prior order) by both non-custodial parents.

IMO mother could be ordered to contribute to support to the extent she is no longer providing in kind support previously contributed when child was living in her household. I doubt it would significantly reduce OP's obligation.

Dueller · 01-05-2010, 06:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by drcoastline

Oh and the short answer to your question,

"legally would I still be required to pay support?"

is YES. You are legally required to pay support until you are legally not required to pay support. That will only happen when the court vacates the order. Even if both of the requirements in your order are met she turns 18 or finishes high school the order does not just die. It must be vacated by the court.

Stop paying even if your wife says it's OK and the state will come looking for you. Your daughter is a ward of the state.

I think the court order clearly states the termination of CS...18 or completes HS, whichever comes last (per OP). No need to "vacate" if those contingencies come to pass.

I wopuld agree that currently he has an ongoing obligation to continue paying.

drcoastline · 01-05-2010, 06:59 AM

Dueller,

Yes that is what I understood regarding residency.

Understand that Child support "payments" are an obligation to the Alternate Parent. There typically support payments are not charged to the Primary parent and an obligation to pay. There is a calculation for Primary and Alternate parents shares but only the Alternate has a court ordered obligation.

As an example. When I was Alternate Parent I was "ordered to pay $" payments had to be made through probation. My Ex did not receive an order to pay X dollars. If I missed I would get a notice pay or else. Miss to many in a row and you had a court date. They did not track how much was paid by my Ex nor did they care. They just assumed she was paying her share. Now I am Primary and the roll is reversed.

So Starlifters EX can just say I have had enough she is 18 and I'm finished taking care of her and nothing will happen to the EX. Which it sounds like is exactly what she did. If Starlifter just stops paying support the state is going to come looking for him. Also if payments are made directly to the child they may not recognize those payments as being made. Keep in mind this is NJ I'm talking about but as I understand it WA is even more liberal then NJ.

If the order is a WA order and Starlifter is in WA it makes it easier for them to enforce because he is in state. If the order is a KY order it is easier for Starlifter to stop paying with out amending the order as it is harder to enforce because KY will not go to WA and get him and WA will not extradite. Just don't visit KY and get in trouble and you should be OK.

drcoastline · 07:12 AM

Dueller,

I would disagree that the order is automatically vacated even if both terms are met.

We have a court order not a contract. Orders don't just die they get vacated.

Contracts die when obligations by both parties are met. We don't have a contract between two parties that says you do this and Ill do that.

We have an order by the court saying you do this and you do that. Therefore the court will determine when and if the terms of the order have been met and then and only then will the order be vacated by the court and the parties released of their obligations.

Dueller · 08:40 AM

' don't wanna get in a battle of semantics with you, drC

But I never said the existing order would be vacated. By its terms (as relayed by OP) the WA court order will expire upon certain contingencies or by operation of law; i.e., the child marries, dies, joins the armed forces, or graduates from HS/attains age 18, etc. Thus there is no need to "vacate."

While I'm not licensed in WA, I've handled a number of CS cases across jurisdictional lines. "Alternate parent" may be a term used in the nether regions of Joisey, but it is not one that is universal to any other jurisdiction with which I am familiar. Most speak in terms of "custodial" vs "non-custodial" parents. In the present case neither parent is "custodial" therefor both may (or may not) be liable for ongoing support until the child reaches age 18/graduates from HS. Admiitedly it is a fact dependent scenario (as to emancipation, etc) and the current order stands until modified (vacated, if you wish) by a court of competent jurisdiction.

That being said there are only 5 months until the question becomes moot...OP will have to decide if its worth the hassle/expense to hail his ex (and the child) into court to deal with his concerns.