Comments on: Utah’s New Child Support Guidelines

By: rebecca

rebecca — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 23:34:26 +0000

The Utah Legislature cleared up the issue as to whether the new guidelines apply if there is only a temporary order in place prior to the first of this year. The Legislature passed Senate Bill 198 which clearly states that the new guidelines apply if there were no final orders prior to January 1st of 2008.

By: rebecca

rebecca — Fri, 14 Mar 2008 23:07:24 +0000

@Custody: Thank you for commenting on this blog entry. It appears that you may be writing from Georgia, as your code reference appears to be regarding Georgia Code. Readers should keep in mind that states vary on definitions and use of "joint custody." Utah Code defines joint legal custody differently than Georgia does. Please see Utah Code Annotated sections 30-3-10.1 through 30-3-10.3. Further, Utah Code provides in section 30-3-10.3(4) that if the final order regarding joint legal custody fails to be specific as to the parental rights of the parent with less physical time, the other parent (the primary custodial parent) may make the default decision on legal custody issues. This year, the Utah Legistlature proposed legislation to make joint legal custody a presumption, allowing that presumption to be rebutted by a showing that joint legal custody was not in the child's best interest. This legislation did not pass, and instead the code makes only the non-commital statement that, "The court shall, in every case, consider joint custody but may award any form of custody which is determined to be in the best interest of the child." This code provision, Utah Code Annotated section 30-3-10(1)(b), does not specify whether it is talking about physical custody, legal custody, or both. Thanks again for your comments.

By: Custody

Custody — Fri, 14 Mar 2008 22:08:20 +0000

One way to try to include the non- custodial parent or secondary custodian in the decision making regarding their child is for the parents to have joint legal custody. The law currently allows joint legal custody to be awarded, and in most cases it probably is awarded. OCGA 19- 9- 6 states, “‘Joint legal custody’ means both parents have equal rights and responsibilities for major decisions concerning the child, including the child’s education, health care, and religious training; provided, however, that the…

By: Paul

Paul — Sun, 06 Jan 2008 23:28:56 +0000

…I have heard whisperings that the legislature intends to add the word “final” to the statute….

Thanks for the update. When do you think this change might happen?

By: rebecca

rebecca — Sun, 06 Jan 2008 20:57:24 +0000

Since this blog entry was written, I attended a conference with many Utah family lawyers in attendance. In the last paragraph above I wrote “The new guidelines are to be used in any case where a FINAL (emphasis added) order did not issue prior to January 1, 2008.” Based on the divided camps at this conference, apparently there is a huge debate as to whether FINAL orders are necessary or if even a temporary order issued in 2007 or before willl prevent the court from applying the new guidelines in a case as a final matter prior to January 2010.

I continue to believe that the legislature means a final order and that this is how the provision will be interpreted by the courts. I have heard whisperings that the legislature intends to add the word “final” to the statute. Moreover, in cases where the parties incomes exceed the top of the chart on the pre-2008 guidelines, I think that the court would not find it to be equitabe to apply the lower guidelines when there is now a source of higher numbers that is not mere extrapolation of the old formula (a practice disallowed by the court).

I would welcome any discussion regarding this question.