OHRoadwarrior
Senior Member
The court does not need to have the expectation that they will work. It only needs to order support be paid and enforce noncompliance with a contempt finding.
-
FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.
my ex wife is on permanent ssi and...
- Thread starter round 1
- Start date
Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills Please click a topic or scroll down for more.
Proserpina
Senior Member
OHRoadwarrior
Senior Member
Not a back pedal at all. The court can require she pay support. The court cannot require attachment of her SSI. You figure out how she will avoid being held in contempt. As I said earlier "The court might expect her to work 10 hours a week to come up with this money." The could also expect her to grow a money tree or sell her body. The bottom line is the court can order it, without worrying about how she is going to pay it.
Proserpina
Senior Member
You must have some awesome calf muscles from all of this back pedaling!
Don't embarrass yourself further on this thread. Really.
OHRoadwarrior
Senior Member
Pro, you are peeing upwind. I suggest you duck.
single317dad
Senior Member
Prostitution? Panhandling? Playing the lottery? Wishing on a star? Marrying someone with a job?
You contradict yourself inside a single paragraph. By the way the Pope called, your Crusade has been cancelled.
OHRoadwarrior
Senior Member
So put up or shut up. Plz show me with what you claim to be your superior knowledge, a case where the court has its power to issue a ruling taken away, by someone being on SSI. 
single317dad
Senior Member
Generally, he who makes an assertion bears the burden of proof.
Your citation (assuming it's http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=481&invol=619 since you neither confirmed nor denied that, and never provided one in the first place) does not mention SSI anywhere at all. It mentions SS and SSD and SS children's benefit and VA disability (which is also generally considered non-garnishable), but not SSI.
No one's saying the court can't order the support paid; it's a question of enforcement. Might the court expect the indigent, disabled party to work to pay the ordered amount? In most jurisdictions, that's considered an unreasonable expectation, and most CSEAs won't pursue the case or even keep it active because it's unenforceable. The recipient collects SSI specifically because they have no income or assets and are not expected to have any, and they are incapable of regular employment to improve their situation.
So, to summarize:
List of things a judge can do:
[x] Order child support be paid
[ ] Expect a party to work 10 hours a week
Your citation (assuming it's http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=481&invol=619 since you neither confirmed nor denied that, and never provided one in the first place) does not mention SSI anywhere at all. It mentions SS and SSD and SS children's benefit and VA disability (which is also generally considered non-garnishable), but not SSI.
No one's saying the court can't order the support paid; it's a question of enforcement. Might the court expect the indigent, disabled party to work to pay the ordered amount? In most jurisdictions, that's considered an unreasonable expectation, and most CSEAs won't pursue the case or even keep it active because it's unenforceable. The recipient collects SSI specifically because they have no income or assets and are not expected to have any, and they are incapable of regular employment to improve their situation.
So, to summarize:
List of things a judge can do:
[x] Order child support be paid
[ ] Expect a party to work 10 hours a week
OHRoadwarrior
Senior Member
The expectation is a presumption. I did not say the court could order her to. I said they can make an order based on the judge feeling she had the ability to. To repeat
Judge: I am going to order you pay $75 a month in support.
OP: Your honor I'm disabled and receiving SSI. How do you expect me to pay it.
Judge: I cannot order it be withheld from your SSI. I would expect you to find another way to pay it. Based on my analysis of your physical limitations, I would expect the easiest way is for you to get a part time job. That is not my problem OP. It is your problem.
Done peeing in the wind Single317dad or do you want to continue trying to twist my words?
Judge: I am going to order you pay $75 a month in support.
OP: Your honor I'm disabled and receiving SSI. How do you expect me to pay it.
Judge: I cannot order it be withheld from your SSI. I would expect you to find another way to pay it. Based on my analysis of your physical limitations, I would expect the easiest way is for you to get a part time job. That is not my problem OP. It is your problem.
Done peeing in the wind Single317dad or do you want to continue trying to twist my words?
OHRoadwarrior
Senior Member
Then the other perspective is, if all the people on disability are so disabled, how can some drink, party and procreate so easily.
single317dad
Senior Member
Again with the crusading. This is a legal advice site. You should be posting this to Facebook so all your friends can Like and Share.
In my state--which is not the OP's and my job, which is Child Support--the CSED office would most likely set a zero (or very small) obligation if the ncp was on SSI. If an obligation was set and not modified, it would be quite unlikely that CSED/the county would initiate contempt proceedings against a person who is a recipient of any type of needs based public assistance (think TANF SSI, etc).
That being said, on the enforcement side, I have done bank levies in consecutive months to encourage such NCPs to enter into a payment agreement to pay something. Once the NCP proves that the money is from a needs based source (SSI or TANF), I must release the frozen funds, however it does tend to get people's attention, and once they realize I can do this every single month and make them source the money every single months, they often will enter into a payment agreement and request a modification of their support.
That being said, on the enforcement side, I have done bank levies in consecutive months to encourage such NCPs to enter into a payment agreement to pay something. Once the NCP proves that the money is from a needs based source (SSI or TANF), I must release the frozen funds, however it does tend to get people's attention, and once they realize I can do this every single month and make them source the money every single months, they often will enter into a payment agreement and request a modification of their support.
Last edited:
The court may issue a "Seek work"order, however they cannot order any employer to hire the NCP.
Generally speaking, a contempt proceeding against a person on SSI will be unsuccessful due to ther person's genuine inability to pay, as opposed to a willful failure to pay support.
OHRoadwarrior
Senior Member
Actually, it is only a group of "friends" who are seniors here, who use such media to stay in touch with each other. I assume you are friended there also. I don't waste my time with it. That is a fact about the disabled, they are usually able to do something. The criteria is that they are not consistently able to earn over $1000 per month. So a small CS order can be a no brainer for some, if they chose to seek appropriate part time employment. All a particular court is doing is exercising their judicial discretion ascertaining the possibility to do so exists. BTW my so called "crusading" may come from the fact that I have been disabled for over 22 years and have earned a very high full-time income most of them. I can't tell you how many disability recipients I have met, that have abilities to function far beyond those I possess.
Last edited: