Support Accrued While Married

[steven2020]

My question involves child support in the State of: OH

I will try to keep this short.

My future ex-wife and I were married in August 2009 (we are currently locked in divorce proceedings as she refuses to sign the paperwork). Prior to us getting married, we had a child for which I was paying child support through the state of NY, which is where she was living. A few months after we got married she dropped the child support case, quit her job and moved in with me in CA. For a year and a half I was the sole provider of our household, supporting her, our daughter, and her son from a previous relationship. When we decided to split, she moved to OH (where she is originally from) and filed a child support case, and back support was ordered to 2009. My wages were soon garnished, and eventually my retirement was levied for a portion of the back pay. I contacted the Child Support Recovery many times and was brushed off each and every time. Recently, I received another notice indicating another levy was being placed on my bank accounts. I contacted the Child Support Recovery again, as well as Department of Health Services, and filed an administrative appeal. I had a hearing and the motion to quash was denied and they are saying I am fully responsible for the back pay (child support due while we were married). What are my options? I cannot afford to hire an attorney as the divorce has already sucked me dry. Is it legal for her to collect child support while we were married?

[Mr. Knowitall]

A few months after we got married she dropped the child support case...

Exactly what do you mean by "dropped"?

...she moved to OH (where she is originally from) and filed a child support case, and back support was ordered to 2009.

You were served with her petition and notice of the proceedings? Did you choose not to respond? If you did respond, why did they use the 2009 date instead of your separation date? Was this in fact a transfer and continuation of the New York order, which was not enforced but remained in effect? The details matter.

I had a hearing and the motion to quash was denied and they are saying I am fully responsible for the back pay (child support due while we were married).

You requested a hearing on some basis, presented an argument of some sort, she presented a counter-argument, and the court ruled based upon whatever happened. If you want us to comment, you need to fill in the blanks.

What are my options?

Generally speaking, your options after you lose a hearing are to petition for reconsideration or to appeal, with strict time limits on both.

I cannot afford to hire an attorney as the divorce has already sucked me dry.

At this point it appears you can't afford not to consult a lawyer. We aren't even in a position to comment on what happened, as we don't know the relevant facts or procedural history.

Is it legal for her to collect child support while we were married?

Had you defended properly I expect the court would not have awarded the support, but you apparently did not and thus this is what the court ordered.

[steven2020]

"Exactly, what do you mean by "dropped"?"

My wages were being automatically garnished. Once she moved in with me she closed the child support case, and my wages were no longer being garnished.

You were served with her petition and notice of the proceedings? Did you choose not to respond? If you did respond, why did they use the 2009 date instead of your separation date? Was this in fact a transfer and continuation of the New York order, which was not enforced but remained in effect? The details matter.

I was never served at all. For months I did not know where she was at with the kids. When she disappeared and left the state she opened a case for public assistance. I did not know where they were living until I received paperwork in the mail which indicated my wages were going to be garnished with a certain amount, which I was fine with. I do not have any problems with paying child support that I owe, but it is the back support from when we were living together that I have an issue with. Come to find out when she moved to OH she mentioned the existence of a previous order for our daughter, and OH converted that order.

You requested a hearing on some basis, presented an argument of some sort, she presented a counter-argument, and the court ruled based upon whatever happened. If you want us to comment, you need to fill in the blanks.

For months I spoke back and forth with the individual handling the case regarding the back support. All he ever told me was that I could file a written appeal and they would look over it and make a decision. I even had my former lawyer contact this individual, she explained the situation to him, and he still proceeded to order the levy. After my account was levied, I sent a notice indicating I wanted to challenge the levy. I never received a response. I then sent another challenge to the Department of Health Services (and the child support office again) and that is when I was granted a hearing. I requested a hearing and presented evidence of the fact that we were married, living together, and that she was unemployed (which was all in her response to my divorce filing). Because I do not live in OH this was done as a telephonic hearing with the local child support office. My soon to be ex-wife was not involved in this hearing at all. A few days later I learned the motion was denied.

Generally speaking, your options after you lose a hearing are to petition for reconsideration or to appeal, with strict time limits on both.

Seeing as though I do not live in OH how are appeals granted when the individual lives in another state?

[Mr. Knowitall]

We're not going to be able to muddle through this, with your not being aware of the procedural history of your case. Your former lawyer presumably understands the procedural history, so perhaps she can explain things to you. You can also obtain copies of the court files from the states involved to try to figure out what happened.t I doubt you're going to dig your way out without a lawyer (and by this point, perhaps not even then).