Incorrect information on the forum

[garrula lingua]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Texas
There were quite a few incorrect posts in response to the question of whether an Obligor in Texas can receive credit for other children s/he has (regardless of the date of their birth). [Thread by Blessedmama, which is now locked]

The correct answer to the OP was by chynna.

Yes, the Obligor gets credit for other children.

There are two ways of calculating the credit: a chart with corresponding percentage differences (eg it's 20% for one m/c, but if there is another child of Obligor in her/his household or under court order for support, the % goes to 17.5, and downward for additional children). This chart doesn't translate well on the internet code sites.

The second method is stated in Tx Family Code, Section
§ 154.128. COMPUTING SUPPORT FOR CHILDREN IN MORE THAN
ONE HOUSEHOLD. (a) In applying the child support guidelines for
an obligor who has children in more than one household, the court
shall apply the percentage guidelines in this subchapter by making
the following computation:
(1) determine the amount of child support that would
be ordered if all children whom the obligor has the legal duty to
support lived in one household by applying the schedule in this
subchapter;
(2) compute a child support credit for the obligor's
children who are not before the court by dividing the amount
determined under Subdivision (1) by the total number of children
whom the obligor is obligated to support and multiplying that
number by the number of the obligor's children who are not before
the court;
(3) determine the adjusted net resources of the
obligor by subtracting the child support credit computed under
Subdivision (2) from the net resources of the obligor; and
(4) determine the child support amount for the
children before the court by applying the percentage guidelines for
one household for the number of children of the obligor before the
court to the obligor's adjusted net resources.
(b) For the purpose of determining a child support credit,
the total number of an obligor's children includes the children
before the court for the establishment or modification of a support
order and any other children, including children residing with the
obligor, whom the obligor has the legal duty of support.
(c) The child support credit with respect to children for
whom the obligor is obligated by an order to pay support is
computed, regardless of whether the obligor is delinquent in child
support payments, without regard to the amount of the order.

Added by Acts 1995, 74th Leg., ch. 20, § 1, eff. April 20, 1995.

I'm an attorney, actively licensed in CA and TX.

I have done quite a few cases in TX regarding child support and have frequently dealt with this issue.

In both the IV-D courts, and the District Courts, the Judges give credit for other children without requiring proof, other than testimony that the child is the Obligor's biological child and whether the Obligor is under court orders to support or the children live in the Obligor's household (a simple 'Yes' answer is sufficient).

We should not allow incorrect information to remain on the forum. That thread was locked, but anyone accessing it later will read completely wrong advice/information.

To the OP of the initial question: Be careful. The c/s amount may go up, even with the credit for the two additional children. Tx is fast at gathering income information, and the order may go up even with credit for two other children.

 

[garrula lingua]

PS: Kudos to Wileybunch who was right.

And Zephyr brought up an excellent issue: no one resides in Tx now.

The Tx order remains the controlling order, but Tx doesn't have jurisdiction. (Military members may try to keep residency in their 'home state', but it causes problems in voting, etc.)

The AL (?) Obligee should see her local IV-D agency & they will send her support order to the OP's state (VA?) for registration, enforcement (and leter, modification under VA law) & VA will become the court of continuing exclusive jurisdiction under UIFSA (Uniform Interstate Family Support Act). [The Court has to make a finding of which court has CEJ)

Conversely, the Obligor can seek the services of his IV-D agency and they will send the order to Al for registration & enforcement & later modification under Alabama law who will then have CEJ.

 

[qurice]

Is there a way the admin can merge this thread into the closed one?

I was really gritting my teeth reading wrong info.

OAG worksheets have it right on them when figuring the support percentage

It asks for:
1. Children before the court,
2. Children supported under another court order and
3. Children in the household that the obligor is legally obligated to support (no steps)

 

[Zephyr]

PS: Kudos to Wileybunch who was right.

And Zephyr brought up an excellent issue: no one resides in Tx now.

basking in the glory

 

[mommabearx1]

So basically if he has other children that he does not have a court order to support he can still get credit for that? How is that correct. What if he has 14 other children, but still just the one order for his first two children. They get nothing? Because your information says the legal duty to supprt. I would think that meant legal by court order? Now if he and the wife of those children split, wouldn't he not have to pay her support until he was ordered to?

 

[chynna1502]

So basically if he has other children that he does not have a court order to support he can still get credit for that? How is that correct. What if he has 14 other children, but still just the one order for his first two children. They get nothing? Because your information says the legal duty to supprt. I would think that meant legal by court order? Now if he and the wife of those children split, wouldn't he not have to pay her support until he was ordered to?

No they dont get nothing, they just get a lower % amount. They take into consideration ALL children, no matter the household. Hope that clears it up a bit?

 

[mommabearx1]

No they dont get nothing, they just get a lower % amount. They take into consideration ALL children, no matter the household. Hope that clears it up a bit?

First, they wouldn't get ANYTHING And second, what would happen if by the 14th child there is no more money? Why would the kids suffer because dad keeps reproducing? I think it is being misinterpreted like I said before legally he isn't required to provide for those kids. Who is legally making him support. What if tomorrow he goes and loses his job, then he can't support them and no one can make him unless wifey ( blessedmama) files to for CS from her husband who lives with her?

This is just my opinion however and I would love for blessed to see how well this would acutally fly in a courtroom.

 

[chynna1502]

First, they wouldn't get ANYTHING And second, what would happen if by the 14th child there is no more money? Why would the kids suffer because dad heeps reproducing? I think it is being misinterpreted like I said before legally he isn't required to provide for those kids. Who is legally making him support. What if tomorrow he goes and loses his job, then he can't support them and no one can make him unless wifey ( blessedmama) files to for CS from her husband who lives with her?

This is just my opinion however and I would love for blessed to see how well this would acutally fly in a courtroom.

First of all, I am sorry my grammer was incorrect, its Friday, I was at a second grade party all day, I am hopped up on sugar. Second of all, this does happen all the time in courtrooms in Texas. That is the law, they take into consideration how many children you have in ALL. I provide in the last link, that was closed, the pdf that is used in Travis county, it shows the %'s and how they go down based on # of children. I can repost here if someone wants to see it.

 

[Perky]

First, they wouldn't get ANYTHING And second, what would happen if by the 14th child there is no more money? Why would the kids suffer because dad heeps reproducing? I think it is being misinterpreted like I said before legally he isn't required to provide for those kids. Who is legally making him support. What if tomorrow he goes and loses his job, then he can't support them and no one can make him unless wifey ( blessedmama) files to for CS from her husband who lives with her?

This is just my opinion however and I would love for blessed to see how well this would acutally fly in a courtroom.

Wow! The statutes were posted. An explanation was given by an attorney who practices in Texas. What's the problem?

Also, Chynna's sentence, while awkward, was not incorrect. Your 'correction' changed the meaning of her statement.

 

[mommabearx1]

First of all, I am sorry my grammer was incorrect, its Friday, I was at a second grade party all day, I am hopped up on sugar. Second of all, this does happen all the time in courtrooms in Texas. That is the law, they take into consideration how many children you have in ALL. I provide in the last link, that was closed, the pdf that is used in Travis county, it shows the %'s and how they go down based on # of children. I can repost here if someone wants to see it.

First had I been at a 2nd grade party all day I would be hopped up on liquor
All I am trying to say is how is he legally Required to support those children? What if he was a dead beat dad and didn't have a job or only one that paid for the CS he is ordered to pay and new wife is fine with that. How can the courts take inoto account waht he pays for his other children unless they also take inot account how much his wife makes, which unless the laws are different in TX they won't calculate spouses income fore CS.

I am fully aware I'm a lowly member I just am not able to wrap my brain around this one.

 

[mommabearx1]

Wow! The statutes were posted. An explanation was given by an attorney who practices in Texas. What's the problem?

Also, Chynna's sentence, while awkward, was not incorrect. Your 'correction' changed the meaning of her statement.

The problem is, or my question rather, how is he legally responsible to pay for those children?

 

[Perky]

The problem is, or my question rather, how is he legally responsible to pay for those children?

He is legally responsible for ALL of his children, including those within the marriage:

http://www.fastlaws.com/index.php?id=txfa151_001

 

[chynna1502]

A drink would have certainly helped today. My step kids schools are a bit touchy about drinking will volunteering. (my guess is cause they can't do it)

Back to the CS issue, I am certainly not saying it works all the time. I know people get the short end of the stick, my husband has physcial custody of his kids, they dont take into account her income vs his income. His income has never even been brought into a court room because he is the CP. Texas does things different, they dont take into consideration the CP income at all.

 

[Silverplum]

Thank you most kindly, garrula lingua. Your expertise is so valued here.

 

[wileybunch]

(Military members may try to keep residency in their 'home state', but it causes problems in voting, etc.)

Why problems with voting? Military members routinely vote absentee ballot.