(a) Definition. Expedited processes means administrative and judicial procedures (including IV-D agency procedures) required under section 466(a)(2) and (c) of the Act;
(b) Basic requirement. (1) The State must have in effect and use, in interstate and intrastate cases, expedited processes as specified under this section to establish paternity and to establish, modify, and enforce support orders.
(2) Under expedited processes:
(i) In IV-D cases needing support order establishment, regardless of whether paternity has been established, action to establish support orders must be completed from the date of service of process to the time of disposition within the following timeframes: (A) 75 percent in 6 months; and (B) 90 percent in 12 months.
(ii) In IV-D cases where a support order has been established, actions to enforce the support order must be taken within the timeframes specified in §§ 303.6(c)(2) and 303.100;
(iii) For purposes of the timeframe at § 303.101(b)(2)(i), in cases where the IV-D agency uses long-arm jurisdiction and disposition occurs within 12 months of service of process on the alleged father or noncustodial parent, the case may be counted as a success within the 6 month tier of the timeframe, regardless of when disposition occurs in the 12 month period following service of process.
(iv) Disposition, as used in paragraphs (b)(2)(i) and (iii) of this section, means the date on which a support order is officially established and/or recorded or the action is dismissed.
(c) Safeguards. Under expedited processes:
(1) Paternities and orders established by means other than full judicial process must have the same force and effect under State law as paternities and orders established by full judicial process within the State;
(2) The due process rights of the parties involved must be protected;
(3) The parties must be provided a copy of the voluntary acknowledgment of paternity, paternity determination, and/or support order;
(4) Action taken may be reviewed under the State's generally applicable administrative or judicial procedures.
(d) Functions. The functions performed by presiding officers under expedited processes must include at minimum:
(1) Taking testimony and establishing a record;
(2) Evaluating evidence and making recommendations or decisions to establish paternity and to establish and enforce orders;
(3) Accepting voluntary acknowledgment of paternity or support liability and stipulated agreements setting the amount of support to be paid;
(4) Entering default orders upon a showing that process has been served on the defendant in accordance with State law, that the defendant failed to respond to service in accordance with State procedures, and any additional showing required by State law; and
(5) Ordering genetic tests in contested paternity cases in accordance with § 303.5(d)(1).
(e) Exemption for political subdivisions. A State may request an exemption from any of the requirements of this section for a political subdivision on the basis of the effectiveness and timeliness of paternity establishment, support order issuance or enforcement within the political subdivision in accordance with the provisions of § 302.70(d) of this chapter.
(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control number 0960-0385)
[50 FR 19655, May 9, 1985, as amended at 50 FR 23958, June 7, 1985; 59 FR 66251, Dec. 23, 1994; 64 FR 6252, Feb. 9, 1999; 68 FR 25305, May 12, 2003]
Notes of Decisions
Marriage of Holmberg v. Holmberg, 578 N.W.2d 817 (Minn. Ct. App. 1998).
· cites it 6× “V 1983) (addressing establishment and collection of child support); 45 C.F.R. § 303.101 (1993) (same). To address these concerns, the legislature delegated to non-judge members of the executive branch broad authority over matters traditionally determined by the judicial branch.”
Sheils v. Bucks Cnty. Dom. Relations Section, 921 F. Supp. 2d 396 (E.D. Pa. 2013).
· cites it 3× “5 We also assumed for the sake of argument that 45 C.F.R. § 303.101 created an implied right of action 6 and held that Sheils’s claim under this Social Security regulation was barred by Eleventh Amendment immunity.”
Perry v. Perry, 611 A.2d 400 (Conn. 1992).
· cites it 2× “) 45 C.F.R. § 303.101 (a). 2 In compliance with the processes mandated by the federal act, the legislature, by the passage of § 46b-231 (d) created “the family support magistrate division of the superior court for the purpose of the impartial administration of child and spousal…”
In Re the Marriage of Soden, 834 P.2d 358 (Kan. 1992).
· cites it 3× “” 45 C.F.R. § 303.101 (a) (1991). The federal government requires that the expedited processes safeguard the due process rights of the parties and ensure the opportunity for judicial review according to the state’s procedures.”
Fitzgerald v. Fitzgerald, 566 A.2d 719 (D.C. 1989).
· cites it 2× “45 C.F.R. § 303.101 (1988). In 1986, Congress undertook to bring the District into compliance with these requirements as part of the District of Columbia Judicial Efficiency and Improvement Act.”
Clark v. Superior Court, 98 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2134 (Cal. Ct. App. 1998).
· cites it 2× “45 C.F.R. § 303.101 (b)(2)(i) (1997).) [7] Since 1979, DNA tests have been developed which can establish paternity to an unquestionable certainty.”
Drennen v. Drennen, 426 N.W.2d 252 (Neb. 1988).
“See 45 C.F.R. § 303.101 (c)(5)and(d)(2) (1987).”
Amend. to Fl. Fam. Law Rules of Proc., 723 So. 2d 208 (Fla. 1998).
“§ 666 (a)(2)(1994); 45 C.F.R. § 303.101 (b)(1)(1997). We agree that the support issues to be considered by a hearing officer may be extended to include alimony enforcement issues related to an ongoing child support matter, but, for the reasons expressed below, we decline to…”
Connell v. State, Dep't of Soc. & Rehab. Servs., 930 P.2d 88 (Mont. 1997).
“45 C.F.R. § 303.101 (1989). CSED not only missed all legally imposed time frames for completion of this action, but it also blatantly violated all notions of procedural fairness by failing to act for a period of 44 months after the expiration of the deadline for submitting…”
Sierra v. Lozada, 623 A.2d 1045 (Conn. App. Ct. 1993).
“General Statutes § 46b-231 (m) (2); see 45 C.F.R. 303.101. The allegations in the cross complaint exceeded the scope of the application for a show cause order under General Statutes § 46b-172 (b).”
Comm'r of Soc. Servs. v. Paulino F., 146 Misc. 2d 1014 (N.Y.C. Fam. Ct. 1990).
“Under 45 CFR 303.101, New York is required to use expedited process to establish or enforce support obligations in title IV-D cases.”
— 45 C.F.R. § 303.101(c)(6) — 1 case
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.