State, Dept. of Health and Welfare ex rel. State of Wash. ex rel. Nicklaus v. Annen
| Citation | 126 Idaho 691,889 P.2d 720 |
| Decision Date | 13 February 1995 |
| Docket Number | Docket No. 20499 |
| Parties | STATE of Idaho, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND WELFARE, ex rel., STATE OF WASHINGTON, ex rel., Virginia F. NICKLAUS, Plaintiff-Respondent-Cross-Appellant, v. Roger ANNEN, Defendant-Appellant-Cross-Respondent. Pocatello, May 1994 Term |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Idaho |
Page 720
v.
Roger ANNEN, Defendant-Appellant-Cross-Respondent.
Feb. 13, 1995.
Ronald J. Jarman, Pocatello, for appellant.
Larry EchoHawk, Atty. Gen. and Margaret C. Lawless, Deputy Atty. Gen., Boise, for respondent. Margaret C. Lawless argued.
PER CURIAM.
This is a paternity action brought ten years after the birth of the child in question by the Idaho Department of Health and Welfare. The central issue is whether the
Page 721
[126 Idaho 692] State's action is barred by laches. We hold that it is not, vacate the magistrate's order which dismissed this action on grounds of laches, and remand this case for further proceedings.I.
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
In July 1980, seventeen-year-old Virginia Nicklaus (Nicklaus) gave birth to a baby girl, Jennifer. Nicklaus received public aid for the birth from the State of Idaho. Nicklaus told the State the father was Appellant Roger Annen (Annen), then twenty-eight. The State advised Annen of his support obligation soon after Jennifer's birth. He denied paternity.
In late 1980, Nicklaus and her child moved to the state of Washington. They lived there until this action was filed in October 1990. For most of that time, Nicklaus received child support benefits from the State of Washington.
After his denial of paternity in 1980, Annen heard nothing from either Idaho or Washington until ten years later when Idaho instituted this action on behalf of Washington pursuant to Idaho's version of the Revised Uniform Reciprocal Enforcement of Support Act. See former I.C. §§ 7-1048 through 7-1089 (1969).
At trial, the State of Idaho sought to establish paternity and an order for reimbursement of support payments on behalf of Jennifer dating back to 1989, as well as future support. Evidence at trial from blood tests indicated the probability of Annen's paternity is 99.99%. The State agreed it was precluded from seeking reimbursement for expenditures before 1989 because of the three-year statute of limitations in I.C. § 5-218 pertaining to obligations created by statute.
Annen asserted the defense of laches. He claimed prejudice from the State's ten-year delay because his financial obligations to his current wife and four children consume nearly all his income, and he committed to these obligations without knowledge that the State would seek past and future child support. The State responded that (1) laches cannot be asserted against the State acting in the public interest, (2) Annen failed to establish prejudice to support a laches defense, and (3) laches is unavailable where the claim is not barred by the applicable statute of limitations. Here, the claim is not barred, says the State, because Idaho allows paternity actions at any time before the child turns eighteen. I.C. § 7-1107, I.C. § 32-101.
The magistrate found in favor of Annen based on laches, and dismissed the case. The State appealed to the district court. The district court reversed, ruling that although the magistrate properly found laches had been established, laches could not be asserted against the State in this case.
II.
"This Court reviews the decision of a magistrate judge independently of a district judge sitting in an appellate capacity, but with due regard to the district judge's ruling." Ireland v. Ireland, 123 Idaho 955, 957-58, 855 P.2d 40, 42-43 (1993). "We will uphold the magistrate's findings of fact if supported by substantial and competent evidence." Id. On issues of law, we exercise free review. Ausman v. State, 124 Idaho 839, 841, 864 P.2d 1126, 1128 (1993).
III.
ANNEN'S FINANCIAL CIRCUMSTANCES DO NOT CONSTITUTE MATERIAL PREJUDICE
"The doctrine of laches is a creation of equity and is a species of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Fludd v. Kirkwood, 1297, Sept. Term, 2020
...v. Craven , 301 Ga. 30, 799 S.E.2d 172, 173 (2017) ; State, Dep't of Health & Welfare ex rel. State of Wash. ex rel. Nicklaus v. Annen , 126 Idaho 691, 889 P.2d 720, 722 (1995) ; Knaus v. York , 586 N.E.2d 909, 914 (Ind. Ct. App. 1992) ; Strecker v. Wilkinson , 220 Kan. 292, 552 P.2d 979, 9......
-
Loomis, In re, 20226
...882, 887 (N.C.Ct.App.1989)(refusing to apply laches to action for retroactive child support). State Dep't of Health & Welfare v. Annen, 126 Idaho 691, 889 P.2d 720, 722 (1995). Likewise, in upholding a claim for past child support, the Minnesota Supreme Court stated in M.A.D. v. P.R., 277 N......
-
Fludd v. Kirkwood, 1297-2020
...2006); Wynn v. Craven, 799 S.E.2d 172, 173 (Ga. 2017); State, Dep't of Health & Welfare ex rel. State of Wash. ex rel. Nicklaus v. Annen, 889 P.2d 720, 722 (Idaho 1995); Knaus v. York, 586 N.E.2d 909, 914 (Ind.Ct.App. 1992); Strecker v. Wilkinson, 552 P.2d 979, 984-85 (Kan. 1976); Holmes v.......
-
State v. Garcia, Docket No. 42516
...is not held to be barred.Henderson v. Smith, 128 Idaho 444, 449, 915 P.2d 6, 11 (1996) (quoting State Dep't of Health & Welfare v. Annen, 126 Idaho 691, 692-93, 889 P.2d 720, 721-22 (1995)). Clearly, some modification of this formulation is necessary to address civil contempt proceedings. T......