ohiocsquestion
newbie
Reged: 10/26/10
Posts: 28
|
|
I just received a child support worksheet from my ex's attorneys. I am the custodial parent. I am currently disabled and receive retirement from my former employer and SS benefits. My daughter receives benefits too as a result.
I am confused because this child support worksheet is deducting my daughter's SS payments from the child support obligation owed by my ex. Why would this be? It doesn't make sense to me.
I have called and emailed the attorney's office to ask why but so far all they are telling me is that if I disagree with the worksheet I can request a court hearing. I don't want to cause extra trouble and expense to my ex if this is the correct calculation.
Does anyone here have any insight into this situation?
Thanks for your help.
Crossposting on Ohio forum as well.
--------------------
An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. Mohandas Gandhi
|
finz
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 06/17/08
Posts: 6460
|
|
I would think the intent would be to deduct herr SSDI checks from his CS amount ONLY if the SSDI was because of your ex's disability.
What is the exact wording ?
|
Miranda
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 06/02/05
Posts: 20822
Loc: North of Mexico
|
|
I would think all income would be taken into the CS worksheet and her $$$ is considered income therefore reducing his obligation.
--------------------
13.1...because I am only half crazy!
|
ohiocsquestion
newbie
Reged: 10/26/10
Posts: 28
|
|
That's another problem. The end of the sentence is cut off at the page break. All it says is the benefits are "due to...".
When I looked online for similar documents they seem to indicate that those benefits are to be deducted from the obligation of the parent who receives the benefits.
Here's an example (item
--------------------
An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. Mohandas Gandhi
|
ohiocsquestion
newbie
Reged: 10/26/10
Posts: 28
|
|
Sorry. Posting on my phone and I hit the wrong button.
Here's the example (item 22):
[censored]://codes.ohio.gov/orc/3119.023
--------------------
An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. Mohandas Gandhi
|
Avaya
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 02/09/06
Posts: 9816
Loc: Arkansas
|
|
[quote] My daughter receives benefits too as a result.
I am confused because this child support worksheet is deducting my daughter's SS payments from the child support obligation owed by my ex. Why would this be? [/quote]
Because the state says 'this is how much it costs to raise this child' and since SS is contributing $[censored], that gets deducted from the total cost and the parents make up the difference.
--------------------
Eternity is too long to be wrong.
|
youngatheart
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 09/03/05
Posts: 9394
|
|
Avaya, that is NOT true.
This varies by state.
To the original poster, I think you're going to have to request a hearing. Because I think your ex's attorney is wrong. DO NOT sign papers just because they say so.
My first suggestion would be to call the Office of Child Support. [censored]://jfs.ohio.gov/Ocs/cicc.stm
They should be able to answer the questions you have, and I BELIEVE they can help you set up the PROPER child support paperwork.
|
ohiocsquestion
newbie
Reged: 10/26/10
Posts: 28
|
|
I did call them today and they said they are not allowed to answer any questions about CS calculation.
I just hate to rack up more trouble and legal fees over one straightforward question.
Perhaps I'll try to find an attorney for a consultation. Part of the trouble is that my ex 's attorneys don't usually handle divorces so I think it's more likely they could have made a mistake.
--------------------
An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. Mohandas Gandhi
|
googledad
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 12/31/05
Posts: 10207
|
|
OHIO CS Guidelines
Any non-means-tested
benefits, including social
security and veterans'
benefits, paid to and
received by a child or a
person on behalf of the
child due to death,
disability, or retirement
of the parent is DEDUCTED from the ACTUAL ANNUAL CS OBLIGATION .
>>>>>>>> His lawyer is correct .
w ww.franklincountyohio.gov/commissioners/csea/pdf/CSX2-10.pdf
--------------------
Careful. We don't want to learn from this.
|
ohiocsquestion
newbie
Reged: 10/26/10
Posts: 28
|
|
This is so frustrating. If this is correct after this deduction is taken my ex will be paying only about 5% of his income in CS. __c
--------------------
An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. Mohandas Gandhi
|
gr8Dad
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 06/07/04
Posts: 30199
|
|
Well, what is your goal, in regards to child support? Are you looking for enough money to care for the children, or are you looking to stick it to your ex?
--------------------
Why give a "senior" discount, they have had plenty of time to raise the money...
|
finz
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 06/17/08
Posts: 6460
|
|
"disability, or retirement
of the parent is DEDUCTED from the ACTUAL ANNUAL CS OBLIGATION ."
***************************************
I disagree that the ex's lawyer is definitely correct. That says that money because of the disability of THE parent is deducted from THE annual CS obligation.
It doesn't say SSDI benefits from EITHER parent are deducted, it specifically says benefits from THE parent.
One parent doesn't have a CS obligation......and in this case, she is the one who has the SSDI benefit.
OP, some states do add the amount of the child's benefit to your gross income for computing CS.
|
finz
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 06/17/08
Posts: 6460
|
|
[quote]Well, what is your goal, in regards to child support? Are you looking for enough money to care for the children, or are you looking to stick it to your ex? [/quote]
**********************************************
The child's SSDI benefit is intended to be HER contribution to raising the child.
I hope that you are not suggesting that her ex has minimal responsibility to support their child just because she has provided generous benefits for the child.
I KNOW if this was a case of a man providing generous CS, you would be reminding a woman she still has the obligation to pay a fair amount torwards the child's support too.
|
Goodmom
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 06/17/07
Posts: 2011
|
|
That doesn't sound right. I would definitely consult with an attorney.
I would think that if it is going to impact child support, it should be done this way if it is an income share state:
The total child support is arrived at, the split between the parents is determined and the SSD that your child is receiving because of your disability is deducted from your portion. If there is a remaining amount after that, it gets deducted from his portion.
If it isn't an income share state, it should not be deducted from child support at all since it is not coming from his disability.
|
Avaya
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 02/09/06
Posts: 9816
Loc: Arkansas
|
|
[quote].... my ex will be paying only about 5% of his income in CS. __c [/quote]
Ohhhhh, how sad, he wont be suffering enough to suit you......is that what you're saying?
--------------------
Eternity is too long to be wrong.
|
ohiocsquestion
newbie
Reged: 10/26/10
Posts: 28
|
|
[quote][quote].... my ex will be paying only about 5% of his income in CS. __c [/quote]
Ohhhhh, how sad, he wont be suffering enough to suit you......is that what you're saying? [/quote]
No.
--------------------
An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. Mohandas Gandhi
|
ohiocsquestion
newbie
Reged: 10/26/10
Posts: 28
|
|
[quote]Well, what is your goal, in regards to child support? Are you looking for enough money to care for the children, or are you looking to stick it to your ex? [/quote]
My goal is for us both to contribute fairly to our daughter's upbringing. I'm not looking to stick it to anyone, least of all my daughter.
Is this kind of irrelevant and ignorant sniping a usual feature of this forum?
Thanks to all of the more constructive posters who actually tried to answer my question .
--------------------
An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. Mohandas Gandhi
|
Avaya
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 02/09/06
Posts: 9816
Loc: Arkansas
|
|
[quote]
[quote][quote].... my ex will be paying only about 5% of his income in CS. __c [/quote]
Ohhhhh, how sad, he wont be suffering enough to suit you......is that what you're saying? [/quote]
No. [/quote]
Then why does it matter what % of his income CS ends up being?
--------------------
Eternity is too long to be wrong.
|
finz
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 06/17/08
Posts: 6460
|
|
Ummm....because most NCP's pay more in the 17% to 20% range, no matter what their income is, and she can't figure out why a court would think her child is worth so much less ?
|
ohiocsquestion
newbie
Reged: 10/26/10
Posts: 28
|
|
His attorney contacted me via email and asked for a counter offer to avoid a hearing. Why are they asking for a counter if this is all cut and dried?
I told her that it would be acceptable to me if they counted my daughters benefits as my income for purposes of CS calculation but that it should not otherwise be deducted from her father's obligation. I think that would be fair.
--------------------
An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. Mohandas Gandhi
|
gr8Dad
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 06/07/04
Posts: 30199
|
|
So is it that the child's NEEDS are being met, or that one side pays a certain percentage?
Suppose an NCP made BILLIONS of dollars, should the CP get a couple hundred million a year in child support?
--------------------
Why give a "senior" discount, they have had plenty of time to raise the money...
|
youngatheart
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 09/03/05
Posts: 9394
|
|
I don't know about that. The wording is bad...don't get me wrong, but papers are interesting.
I'm really curious as to case law on this in OH. Not curious enough to look it up with a Board meeting tomorrow...but curious.
Personally, I think it's BS if it takes off what the NCP owes in CS...and I would lobby to have that changed. I really like the way OK does ours now.
|
youngatheart
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 09/03/05
Posts: 9394
|
|
[quote][quote].... my ex will be paying only about 5% of his income in CS. __c [/quote]
Ohhhhh, how sad, he wont be suffering enough to suit you......is that what you're saying? [/quote]
I don't think that's what the OP is saying at all.
If Ex got custody of our kids, my CS order wouldn't be lowered (or done away with) because our kids receive SSDI based on their dad's account. The purpose of that SSDI is to cover the $$$ that the disabled parent would otherwise provide for the kid's care. So, in my case, the SSDI is to cover Ex's portion and I pay my portion. That stays the same, whether I'm NCP or CP.
Same SHOULD be true with this person, but I guess that's all up to OH.
|
gr8Dad
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 06/07/04
Posts: 30199
|
|
See, I disagree. Suppose an NCP wasn't paying the support, but a relative was, for whatever reason. Does that make the child support change? It has been determined that it costs X amount of dollars to care for the child. The child gets Y from the government, and the remainder from the NCP.
Seems to me like people are more concerned with MAKING the NCP give up a certain percentage, regardless of what the needs, and that is not a good mentality.
--------------------
Why give a "senior" discount, they have had plenty of time to raise the money...
|
ohiocsquestion
newbie
Reged: 10/26/10
Posts: 28
|
|
No, the child gets Y from MY Social Security benefits that *I* worked more than 30 years to accrue. It makes no more sense than it would for me to get credit for the medical benefits her father gets through his employer.
--------------------
An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. Mohandas Gandhi
|
gr8Dad
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 06/07/04
Posts: 30199
|
|
So turn down money the child should get from social security, and make Dad pay the full amount. And SINCE Dad is working, HE paid into the system as well.
--------------------
Why give a "senior" discount, they have had plenty of time to raise the money...
|
Tweeby
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 06/05/04
Posts: 7100
|
|
Ohio is a dual income State. I'm not sure how Ohio determines disability benefits for the child.
I wonder if your ex has it stated correctly. This is JUST a guess but if the child was getting State benefits for themselves wouldn't the amount come off both parents total contribuation, lowering both parents contribution towards CS. But if it is because of one parent's diability, it should go for the portion of the disabled parent. Perhaps your ex has it listed as the child's diaablity. Like I stated this is just a guess because I don't know anyone with this situation in Ohio.
|
gr8Dad
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 06/07/04
Posts: 30199
|
|
When you are dealing with income shares, ALL income is figured into the equation. If the child was an actor, that income would be figured as well.
The way I read it, the income into each house is figured, then shares are determined. SO yes, it will lower BOTH contributions.
What I find interesting is that everyone is pointing out that the NCP will only be paying about 5% of their income in child support. But the CP is not putting ANY of their income in, so it would be 0%.
--------------------
Why give a "senior" discount, they have had plenty of time to raise the money...
|
ohiocsquestion
newbie
Reged: 10/26/10
Posts: 28
|
|
Your logic is so convoluted as to be nonsensical.
And as it happens DAD hasn't been working in this country long enough to qualify for SS benefits. Which is one of the reasons I deferred any request for spousal support, agreed to go without CS during times he might not be employed, and settled for only a third of our combined savings. We've been separated for 2 years now and this will be the first dollar of CS he's paid. I want only the best for him. He's my daughter's FATHER.
Your assumptions about my intentions are offensive and I think your (and Avaya's) posts say much more about your character than mine.
--------------------
An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. Mohandas Gandhi
|
Tweeby
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 06/05/04
Posts: 7100
|
|
When the child receives disability payments due to the disability of the NCP, isn't that the whole contribution for the NCP. Shouldn't it be the same if the child receives disability payments on behalf of the CP so the payments should be the CP contribution.
I'm not sure how paymetns to the child work for CS, just going by what I have heard on these sites. I bleive that if the child receives disability payments due to the disability of the NCP that was their whole contribution.
|
youngatheart
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 09/03/05
Posts: 9394
|
|
In Oklahoma (also an income share state), this is what happens (and SHOULD, IMO):
The SSDI benefits for the child(ren) is added to the income of the disabled parent.
After the child support is figured, and an amount is arrived at, if the disabled parent is the paying party, then the SSDI benefit for the child(ren) is deducted from that amount. If there’s a balance, then the NCP must pay the balance. If the SSDI is more than the CS amount, the CP still gets all of the SSDI benefit check.
If the disabled parent is not the paying party…well, the SSDI benefit for the kids is NOT deducted from the CS amount…because it’s supposed to be the contribution of the disabled parent.
Now…Ohio could be different, but I would be HIGHLY surprised, and I would recommend doing what can be done to change that.
|
youngatheart
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 09/03/05
Posts: 9394
|
|
Actually, in a lot of states, that SSDI is considered the disabled parent's contribution.
Just as in my case, the SSDI benefits I receive for my kids are considered Ex's contribution.
|
ohiocsquestion
newbie
Reged: 10/26/10
Posts: 28
|
|
[quote]In Oklahoma (also an income share state), this is what happens (and SHOULD, IMO):
The SSDI benefits for the child(ren) is added to the income of the disabled parent.
After the child support is figured, and an amount is arrived at, if the disabled parent is the paying party, then the SSDI benefit for the child(ren) is deducted from that amount. If there’s a balance, then the NCP must pay the balance. If the SSDI is more than the CS amount, the CP still gets all of the SSDI benefit check.
If the disabled parent is not the paying party…well, the SSDI benefit for the kids is NOT deducted from the CS amount…because it’s supposed to be the contribution of the disabled parent.
Now…Ohio could be different, but I would be HIGHLY surprised, and I would recommend doing what can be done to change that. [/quote]
This is the solution I proposed to his attorney when she asked me for a counter offer. We really don't need the hassle and expense of another hearing. And I'm not looking for special treatment. I just want them to follow the guidelines in the Ohio code.
--------------------
An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. Mohandas Gandhi
|
finz
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 06/17/08
Posts: 6460
|
|
[quote]His attorney contacted me via email and asked for a counter offer to avoid a hearing. Why are they asking for a counter if this is all cut and dried?
I told her that it would be acceptable to me if they counted my daughters benefits as my income for purposes of CS calculation but that it should not otherwise be deducted from her father's obligation. I think that would be fair. [/quote]
**********************************************
That's all that I would offer
|
finz
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 06/17/08
Posts: 6460
|
|
[quote]See, I disagree. Suppose an NCP wasn't paying the support, but a relative was, for whatever reason. Does that make the child support change? It has been determined that it costs X amount of dollars to care for the child. The child gets Y from the government, and the remainder from the NCP.
Seems to me like people are more concerned with MAKING the NCP give up a certain percentage, regardless of what the needs, and that is not a good mentality. [/quote]
****************************************
So if the CP also makes a huge salary, you are fine with NCP contributing nothing ?
|
finz
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 06/17/08
Posts: 6460
|
|
The child's SSDI benefit from the disabled parent's family benefit IS to be that parent's contribution to raising their child......and that family benefit is 50% of the disabled person's total benefit. How much more of their income do you think should go directly towards the child ?
|
finz
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 06/17/08
Posts: 6460
|
|
"Seems to me like people are more concerned with MAKING the NCP give up a certain percentage, regardless of what the needs, and that is not a good mentality."
**************************************************
Don't most of us give our kids more than the y actually NEED ?
My children have no biological or material NEED for ice cream, but I've been known to buy it on occassion.
Isn't that why states use a formula to determine CS ? Because they acknowledge that the higher a family's income is, the higher a standard of living those children enjoy ?
My kids have been lucky to get a few trips to Disney......they don't get to fly all over the world in a private jet and party like rockstars like the Hilton girls got to do. If Mr Hilton divorced Mrs Hilton when the kids were younger and was the NCP, I do think he should have paid more than my husband or I would.......and we should pay more than someone who was living in poverty. The children in each case only NEED the same basic essentials to live on, but each set of parents provided different amounts.
|
Miranda
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 06/02/05
Posts: 20822
Loc: North of Mexico
|
|
I read the Ohio statute and it is pretty clear that the child's money is considered in the equation.
--------------------
13.1...because I am only half crazy!
|
ohiocsquestion
newbie
Reged: 10/26/10
Posts: 28
|
|
I'll try again to copy the code here:
22. ACTUAL ANNUAL OBLIGATION:a . Father: line 18a plus line 21a minus line 21c (if the amount on line 21c is greater than or equal to the amount on line 21a —enter the number on line 18a in Col. I).............................. . $..............b . Any non-means-tested benefits, including social security and veterans’ benefits, paid to and received by children for whom the mother is the residential parent and legal custodian or a person on behalf of those children due to death, disability, or retirement of the father…... $..............c . Actual annual obligation of father (subtract line 22b from line 22a)......................... $..............d . Mother: line 18b plus line 21b minus line 21d (if the amount on line 21d is greater than or equal to the amount on line 21b —enter the number on line 18b in Col. II)..................... $..............e . Any non-means-tested benefits, including social security and veterans’ benefits, paid to and received by children for whom the father is the residential parent and legal custodian or a person on behalf of those children due to death, disability, or retirement of the mother…... $..............f . Actual annual obligation of mother (subtract line 22e from line 22d)....................... $..............g . Actual annual obligation payable (subtract lesser actual annual obligation from greater actual annual obligation using amounts
--------------------
An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. Mohandas Gandhi
|
finz
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 06/17/08
Posts: 6460
|
|
"Any non-means-tested benefits, including social security and veterans’ benefits, paid to and received by children for whom the mother is the residential parent and legal custodian or a person on behalf of those children due to death, disability, or retirement of the father…... $.........."
That says the SSDI if it is from the dad........it is not in your case, so that would be a $0
|
ohiocsquestion
newbie
Reged: 10/26/10
Posts: 28
|
|
[quote]"Any non-means-tested benefits, including social security and veterans’ benefits, paid to and received by children for whom the mother is the residential parent and legal custodian or a person on behalf of those children due to death, disability, or retirement of the father…... $.........."
That says the SSDI if it is from the dad........it is not in your case, so that would be a $0 [/quote]
That is how I read it as well and why I brought it to the attorney's attention when they were deducting the full amount from his monthly CS payment. It cut his support nearly in half and effectively made it less than the amount I pay even though according to their own calculations his share of support should have been more than 80% due to the disparity in our incomes. I 'm not looking for a lottery payout here. I'm also responsible for 50% of her college expenses and ALL out of pocket medical expenses. When he starts paying CS I should finally be able to be able to save significantly for those goals.
--------------------
An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. Mohandas Gandhi
|
finz
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 06/17/08
Posts: 6460
|
|
Tell his lawyer to get back to you when he learns how to fill out the form correctly.
|
googledad
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 12/31/05
Posts: 10207
|
|
You might think about using the right worksheet , that would be CHILD SUPPORT COMPUTATION WORKSHEET
SOLE RESIDENTIAL PARENT OR SHARED PARENTING ORDER not
CHILD SUPPORT COMPUTATION WORKSHEET
SPLIT PARENTAL RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES
The statutory language for Section 22 for sole or joint custody CS is :
22. OBLIGATION AFTER ADJUSTMENTS TO CHILD SUPPORT:
a. Father: line 18a plus or minus
the difference between line
21a minus line 21c $.........
b. Mother: line 18b plus or minus
the difference between line
21b minus line 21d $.........
23. ACTUAL ANNUAL OBLIGATION:
a. (Line 22a or 22b, whichever
line corresponds to the
parent who is the obligor). $.........
b. Any non-means-tested
benefits, including social
security and veterans'
benefits, paid to and
received by a child or a
person on behalf of the
child due to death,
disability, or retirement
of the parent............... $.........
c. Actual annual obligation
(subtract line 23b from
line 23a)................... $.........
--------------------
Careful. We don't want to learn from this.
|
googledad
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 12/31/05
Posts: 10207
|
|
His attorney contacted me via email and asked for a counter offer to avoid a hearing. Why are they asking for a counter if this is all cut and dried?
>>>>>>> Because it's not .
I told her that it would be acceptable to me if they counted my daughters benefits as my income for purposes of CS calculation but that it should not otherwise be deducted from her father's obligation. I think that would be fair.
>>>>>>> Unless you agree a judge will decide , SS benefits paid to the child MAY be used but the court can still decide to deviate from the guidelines . Here's your case law .
caselaw.findlaw.com/oh-supreme-court/1132096.html
--------------------
Careful. We don't want to learn from this.
|
ohiocsquestion
newbie
Reged: 10/26/10
Posts: 28
|
|
23. ACTUAL ANNUAL OBLIGATION: a. (Line 22a or 22b, whichever line corresponds to the parent who is the obligor). "
It seems to me that section refers to the parent who is the obligor - which would be my ex. It doesn't say benefits from EITHER parent - it says THE parent right after referring to the obligor.
I genuinely believe these laws are INTENDED to be fair and I cannot believe it is fair for me to pay more in support for my daughter than her father does in our present circumstances.
OTOH I'm also somewhat concerned a judge might be punitive to my ex considering how high his income is now ,some of the concessions I made in regards to CS and marital assets and the fact that he hasn't paid any support yet. I agreed to these things for a reason - my ex is not well established yet as far as Social Security and retirement funding go and needs to catch up in that regard.
If we had to go for a hearing would a judge be likely to be harsh with him or would he/she follow the guidelines and our previous agreements?
--------------------
An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. Mohandas Gandhi
|
ohiocsquestion
newbie
Reged: 10/26/10
Posts: 28
|
|
Thanks for the link, googledad, but that case seems to be for an obligor parent who is disabled which is not my situation.
In fact, even the least advantageous scenario they mentioned (in which the SS benefits are deducted from the total support owed by BOTH parents combined) would be better for me and my daughter than what the attorneys proposed (the SS benefits were deducted entirely from my ex's obligation and not at all from mine).
--------------------
An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. Mohandas Gandhi
|
Goodmom
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 06/17/07
Posts: 2011
|
|
[quote]Thanks for the link, googledad, but that case seems to be for an obligor parent who is disabled which is not my situation.
In fact, even the least advantageous scenario they mentioned (in which the SS benefits are deducted from the total support owed by BOTH parents combined) would be better for me and my daughter than what the attorneys proposed (the SS benefits were deducted entirely from my ex's obligation and not at all from mine). [/quote]
Your ex's attorney represents your ex and is going to calculate child support in a way that most benefits his client. I would respond back with that the SSD that stems from your disability gets deducted entirely from your portion and if there is any left over after that, it gets deducted from his portion. The dependent benefits you are receiving is supposed to cover YOUR support of the child, not his.
You really should at least consult with an attorney. Chances are a judge will deduct it from your portion entirely and if there is any amount left over, deduct the rest from his portion.
Obviously, this isn't something that your ex wants to happen because it would mean that he would actually have to pay his share of the support.
|
googledad
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 12/31/05
Posts: 10207
|
|
Thanks for the link, googledad, but that case seems to be for an obligor parent who is disabled which is not my situation.
>>> The particulars of the suit are unimportant , what is important is the case law cited , namely THIS :
The other position, which the court of appeals in this case followed, is that an obligor disabled parent is not entitled to a full credit for the amount of Social Security benefits his or her child receives.   Instead, the Social Security benefits are deducted from the combined child support obligation of both parents and the remainder of the joint obligation is apportioned between the parents according to their respective shares under the Child Support Guidelines.  Fruchtnicht v. Fruchtnicht (1997), 122 Ohio App.3d 492, 496, 702 N.E.2d 145, 147-148.   See, also, In re Ehritz (June 8, 1998), Butler App. No. CA97-10-193, unreported, 1998 WL 295550;  Previte v. Previte (1994), 99 Ohio App.3d 347, 650 N.E.2d 919;  Slowbe v. Slowbe (Dec. 7, 1995), Cuyahoga App. No. 68739, unreported, 1995 WL 723333;  Barnett v. Hanson (Oct. 31, 1997), Erie App. E-97-050, unreported, 1997 WL 679630.
In fact, even the least advantageous scenario they mentioned (in which the SS benefits are deducted from the total support owed by BOTH parents combined) would be better for me and my daughter than what the attorneys proposed (the SS benefits were deducted entirely from my ex's obligation and not at all from mine).
>>>>> Didn't see that in your post , but deducting the SSDI benefit from the total both parents owe and apportioning the rest would be proper . That doesn't mean a court would agree , even an appeals court .
--------------------
Careful. We don't want to learn from this.
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
