Trial court properly exercised discretion in starting child support from the date of the de novo hearing, but permitting percentage of bonus income to be applied as a lump-sum child support award in lieu of arrears where the trial court vacated the FCC order.
Under §893.40 (1980), an independent action to collect child support arrears which accrued after 1980 must be brought within 20 years of the date the judgment was entered.
New statute limits court’s authority to modify arrearage. Where parties orally agreed to different support payment, equitable estoppel under Shulz and Harms are no longer available. Credit can only be granted under the circumstances in §767.32(1r), Stats., which is retroactive.
Court erred when it imposed a trust on child support arrearages without the consent of the payee and without a finding that she was unable to wisely manage the money.
Per 1993 Wis. Act 481, trial court cannot grant credit for direct payments for support made in a manner other than that prescribed in the order or judgment providing for support.
Equitable estoppel is viable defense to child support arrears.
Maximum arrears assignable is 50% of current child support order.
Equitable credit may be reimbursed from future support, as well as set off against arrears. Husband entitled to equitable credit where child went to live with him, but court erred by not requiring sufficient proof of definitive and specific expenditures.
(1) Arrears found by court in criminal non-support case are not res judicata and do not bind the family court. (2) Retroactive modification of arrears is a discretionary remedy under Schulz v. Ystad, where order was entered prior to August 1, 1987.
(1) Sec. 767.32 (1m) is prospective only and is applicable only to order or judgment made after August 1, 1987. (2) Credits against child support can be granted if made under the compulsion of the circumstances or with the implied or express consent of the payee.
(1) Husband showed change in circumstances to modify child support. (2) Court erred in not giving husband credit against arrears for payments of debts and direct expenses.
Court cannot reduce arrears in child support under new statute. Retroactive applicability is not unconstitutional.
Contempt for child support arrears is still available as a remedy after child turns 18. Halmu decision is overruled.
Laches does not apply to action to collect child support before statute of limitations begins to run when child attains majority. Also, W could collect COLA, even though she did not apply for increase for 5 years.
Criminal rules for appeal, not civil rules, apply to contempt proceedings brought by FCC to enforce payment of child support, not right to court appointed counsel.
Father was still under obligation to pay past due support after all kids had turned 18. Thus, income tax refunds can be seized.
Court can order a party to put up security for future child support if there is a history of arrears.
Remedy for arrearage in alimony is contempt, not a money judgment.
Remedy for arrearage in alimony is contempt, not a money judgment.
Laches prevents wife from seeking enforcement of alimony arrears after a 24 year delay.