Post by Critique on Jan 19, 2007 3:03:28 GMT -5
Jan 12, 2007
LITTLE ROCK (AP) -- A man not the father of a child must still pay child support that a court said he owed the mother before he took a paternity test, the state Supreme Court says.
The court said Thursday that Anthony L. Parker must catch up on his child-support payments to that point, as the "acknowledged father of the child" until then, even though the test showed he was not, in fact, the father.
The ruling reversed a decision by Pulaski County Circuit Judge Mary Spencer McGowan and sent the case back to her to determine the amount Parker must pay.
The decision, written by Associate Justice Donald L. Corbin, said state law and prior court cases make it clear that an "acknowledged father" cannot be relieved of past-due child support.
State law only speaks to a man's future child-support obligations once that person has been found through testing not to be a child's father. Associate Justice Robert L. Brown said in a concurring opinion that the court was "legislating by inference."
Brown urged the state Legislature to clarify the law.
In the case, the state Office of Child Support Enforcement filed a paternity complaint against Parker on April 18, 2002, but Parker did not respond. McGowan entered a judgment of paternity June 20, 2002, and ordered Parker to pay $24 a week in child support and $4,446 in past-due support.
Parker did not pay the money, and the state agency filed a contempt motion against him March 7, 2003. But Parker did not appear for a court hearing on the motion, and the judge issued a pick-up order for him.
Before Parker was arrested in March 2005, the state garnished his wages from June 2004 through February 2005. Parker asked for a paternity test and was found not to be the father.
The state agency continued to pursue past-due support, but McGowan denied the request Feb. 28, 2006.
"To force a man to pay the state ... payments made to a woman for a child that is not his violates all precepts of common law as to who is responsible for supporting a child," McGowan wrote.
hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/A/AR_CHILD_SUPPORT_LAW_AROL-?SITE=VARIT&SECTION=US&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2007-01-11-14-03-10
LITTLE ROCK (AP) -- A man not the father of a child must still pay child support that a court said he owed the mother before he took a paternity test, the state Supreme Court says.
The court said Thursday that Anthony L. Parker must catch up on his child-support payments to that point, as the "acknowledged father of the child" until then, even though the test showed he was not, in fact, the father.
The ruling reversed a decision by Pulaski County Circuit Judge Mary Spencer McGowan and sent the case back to her to determine the amount Parker must pay.
The decision, written by Associate Justice Donald L. Corbin, said state law and prior court cases make it clear that an "acknowledged father" cannot be relieved of past-due child support.
State law only speaks to a man's future child-support obligations once that person has been found through testing not to be a child's father. Associate Justice Robert L. Brown said in a concurring opinion that the court was "legislating by inference."
Brown urged the state Legislature to clarify the law.
In the case, the state Office of Child Support Enforcement filed a paternity complaint against Parker on April 18, 2002, but Parker did not respond. McGowan entered a judgment of paternity June 20, 2002, and ordered Parker to pay $24 a week in child support and $4,446 in past-due support.
Parker did not pay the money, and the state agency filed a contempt motion against him March 7, 2003. But Parker did not appear for a court hearing on the motion, and the judge issued a pick-up order for him.
Before Parker was arrested in March 2005, the state garnished his wages from June 2004 through February 2005. Parker asked for a paternity test and was found not to be the father.
The state agency continued to pursue past-due support, but McGowan denied the request Feb. 28, 2006.
"To force a man to pay the state ... payments made to a woman for a child that is not his violates all precepts of common law as to who is responsible for supporting a child," McGowan wrote.
hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/A/AR_CHILD_SUPPORT_LAW_AROL-?SITE=VARIT&SECTION=US&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2007-01-11-14-03-10