Johns v. Johns
| Decision Date | 31 December 1986 |
| Citation | 500 So.2d 1160 |
| Parties | Patsy JOHNS and State of Alabama v. Edgar L. JOHNS, Jr. Civ. 5391. |
| Court | Alabama Court of Civil Appeals |
William Prendergast and Lois Brasfield, Asst. Attys. Gen., for appellants.
No brief for appellee.
On January 17, 1986 the State Department of Pensions and Security (now Department of Human Resources--DHR) joined with Patsy Ree Johns to obtain overdue child support from Edgar Lee Johns, Jr.
Patsy Ree Johns and Edgar Lee Johns, Jr. were divorced April 1977 and the court ordered Edgar Lee to pay child support in the amount of $25 per week.
The petitioners, DHR and Patsy Ree Johns, sought to have Edgar Lee Johns held in contempt for failure to pay child support. It was alleged and proved without dispute that Edgar Lee had not paid any child support and was $11,424.55 in arrears.
After a hearing the trial court ordered Edgar Lee to start paying $25.00 a week child support but dismissed the contempt request because "said State of Alabama failed to prove the amount of child support it paid to the original Plaintiff and the Court can make no finding as to the amount which the State of Alabama should recover of the Defendant." DHR's posttrial motion was denied and an appeal was perfected to this court.
In brief here, DHR argues that the trial court erred in dismissing its petition for contempt. It says that the amount it paid to Patsy Johns was irrelevant; that when it has paid benefits to a recipient and that recipient has assigned her rights to DHR the department can, under the law, recover from the father the amount of child support previously ordered in a child support decree. See, § 38-10-6, Code 1975. Edgar Lee Johns did not file a brief.
The Child Support Act of 1979, codified as sections 38-10-1 through -11, Code 1975, provides that recipients of aid to families with dependent children are deemed to have assigned to DHR the right to any child support owed to or for any child up to the amount of aid paid by DHR. The DHR is given the right to collect and receive all child support payments due to the custodian of the child. See § 38-10-4, Code 1975. It also is provided in said act that where child support has been ordered by a court incident to a divorce decree the debt shall be limited to the amount specified in the court decree. The liability for such debt to DHR shall apply only to the support payments made during the period when aid was granted to the recipient. § 38-10-6, Code 1975.
After an assignment has been made, child support collections shall be paid directly to DHR and it will make distribution according to the Social Security Act and amendments thereto. § 38-10-8, Code 1975.
The legislature through the provisions of the Child Support Act has given DHR the authority to take appropriate action to assure that a person owing the obligation of child support provides that support. To enable it to carry...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
In re Gray
...repay it for the benefits it has given the recipient. The balance, if any, will be paid to the child\'s custodian. Johns v. Johns, 500 So.2d 1160, 1160-61 (Ala.Civ.App.1986) (parenthetical and emphasis Clearly, in Alabama a child support claim is assigned to the State whenever the State pay......
-
S.J.H. v. N.T.S.
...that aid to assign his or her right to child support owed to him or her to the Department of Human Resources. See Johns v. Johns, 500 So. 2d 1160, 1160 (Ala. Civ. App. 1986) (stating that "recipients of aid to families with dependent children are deemed to have assigned to [the Department o......
-
State ex rel. Van Buren County Dept. of Social Services by Curtis on Behalf of Williamson v. Dempsey
...due as reimbursement for the support it provided to the child, if the parent has the ability to pay. § 38-10-6. See Johns v. Johns, 500 So.2d 1160 (Ala.Civ.App.1986). The record shows that the mother had no duty under the divorce decree to provide child support for the minor son; thus, the ......
-
Ex parte State ex rel. Summerlin
...to reimbursement for the full amount of support it has provided to the child, if the parent has the ability to pay. Johns v. Johns, 500 So.2d 1160 (Ala.Civ.App.1986). Therefore, the principal question is whether the divorce judgment in this case required Mr. Summerlin to pay support. It did......