Opinion ID: 2109237
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 10

Heading: Extent of Mother's Obligation

Text: While not a bar to his ability to recover child support from the mother, the father's past failures to pay child support and alimony do affect the mother's current financial situation. The depletion of her cash dissolution settlement is the result of moneys she had to spend to support the children when the father was failing to make payments. Conversely, the father, although he has debts amounting to about $67,000, most of which relate to his practice, has assets of $57,931 and accounts receivable of $8,000. Nor does the father testify that the children are in need of financial support from the mother. All he says is: I haven't been able to take the children places that I would like to and do things with them that I would like to strictly because of the lack of the finances. .... ... I would like to go out for dinner a couple times a month, but anymore, that's just hamburgers or pizza. It is clear that the father's potential earning capacity, based on his education and experience, is far greater than the mother's. She currently earns a gross income of approximately $16,000 each year, while he has earned in the past, and has the potential of earning in the future, more than twice that amount. This court's child support guidelines, promulgated pursuant to Neb.Rev. Stat. § 42-364.16 (Reissue 1988), came into existence on October 1, 1987, Hamm v. Hamm, supra , and apply to any award made from and after that date. Those guidelines recommend that even in low income cases, minimum support be set. Accordingly, we hold that the court below abused its discretion in not requiring the mother to pay support in the sum of $10 per month per child.