DIAMOND V. DIAMOND
293 P.3d 260 (2012)
NATURE OF THE CASE: Diamond (D) petitioned from a reversal that she could get child
support from her Diamond (M) after D was emancipated.
FACTS: Jhette Diamond (D), then sixteen years old, petitioned the district court in
January 2007 for a declaration of emancipation pursuant to the Act. D left the home of her
mother Adrienne Diamond (M) at age thirteen and had been living with several different
households since that time. D had been working since the age of eleven, including for the
past several years as a restaurant server and busser, while maintaining a high grade-point
average as a sophomore at Espaola Valley High School. D was thriving with the support of
the couple with whom she was living. D had no intention of returning to live with M, who
maintained a relationship with the man whose violent behavior and substance abuse had
contributed to D's decision to leave in the first place. The district court issued a
'Declaration of Emancipation of Minor' in March 2007 and that D shall retain the right to
support from M' pursuant to Section 32A-21-5(D) of the Act. M filed a pro se motion claiming
she was never served and a hearing was held. Testimony revealed that after a severe
alternation M went to live with the boyfriend at his home, leaving D alone in their trailer
with no water, gas, or electricity service due to unpaid bills. D remained in the trailer
until being evicted several months later in the middle of winter. During this period, D
continued to work and attend school full time. D frequently obtained food from a woman who
employed her at a local restaurant. D eventually moved in with the brother of one of her
neighbors, where she lived for several years, continuing to work at a local restaurant,
paying for her own expenses and contributing to rent and other household expenses. D began
living with members of the same extended family, a couple who allowed her to stay with them
rent-free so that she could focus on school. Emancipated status also would allow D to open a
bank account. Once again the court ruled that D was 'an emancipated minor in all respects,
except that she shall retain the right to support from M' pursuant to Section 32A-21-5(D) of
the Act. D filed a petition asking the district court to order M to pay retroactive and
prospective child support to Daughter. The hearing officer recommended that M be ordered to
make support payments to D in the amount of $390.00 per month from March 1, 2008 until
Daughter reached the age of eighteen or graduated from high school, whichever event occurred
later. After more motions and hearings, the court entered judgment in D's favor in the
amount of $15,278.00 (with $13,640.00 of that total owed as pre-emancipation support, and
$1,638.00 owed as the remaining balance from the period post-dating D's emancipation), and
directed M to make specified monthly payments to fulfill her support obligation. M appealed.
It agreed with M that the law does not permit an emancipated child to receive child support.
It reversed the holding. D appealed.
ISSUE:
RULE OF LAW:
HOLDING AND DECISION:
LEGAL ANALYSIS:
Get
free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online
for 2-3 days and free samples
of all kinds of products.
for 2-3 days and free samples of all kinds of products.
https://bsmsphd.com
© 2007-2016 Abn Study Partner
No comments:
Post a Comment