Opinion ID: 2016516
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: judgment for temporary child support

Text: The first assignment of error, by which the husband asserts the trial court erred in failing to cancel the judgment arising out of the award of temporary child support, must be resolved against the husband because the record is such that no meaningful review of the issue can be conducted. Other than a reference to the fact that the amount of the temporary allowance was $250, the sum total of the record on the matter is the following exchange between the husband and his attorney: [Attorney:] Now, Mr. Preston, I do know that there was a temporary order made. Do you pay support to Mrs. Preston; is that right? [Husband:] Yes, there was. [Attorney:] Have you made the support from the month of July on, I mean, meaning to this date? [Husband:] I thought I had made the July payment, according to the clerk I did not, so from July on I have not made that payment. [Attorney:] Why have you not done that? [Husband:] I have not had income, I have had, you know, the boys came in during that time and the expenses definitely did go up during that time and there wasn't money there to pay it. [Attorney:] Are you asking the Court pursuant to the power of the Court to give you credit for taking and providing 100 percent of the boys' support since July? [Husband:] Yes, I would, if that is possible. This exchange does not establish that the temporary support was for child support only. Without the actual order before us, we cannot determine whether the temporary allowance was for child support, alimony, or both. The applicable rule in this connection is that an appellant has the obligation to present a record which supports the errors assigned; absent such a record, the decision of the lower court is to be affirmed. Howard v. Howard, 234 Neb. 661, 452 N.W.2d 283 (1990).