O.C.G.A.
O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 19-11-5 (2019)

Debt to state created by payment of public assistance; amount of debt; waiver, reduction, or negotiation of certain repayments

✓ O.C.G.A. — 2019 edition (Public.Resource.Org Release 73)
Code text and O.C.G.A. statutory annotations on this page reflect the 2019 Official Code of Georgia Annotated (Public.Resource.Org Release 73, 2019-08-21; public domain per Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, 2020). The Syfert case-law annotations in Notes of Decisions, below, are current.
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section GA-LEGlegis.ga.gov (official) JustiaJustia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) The payment of public assistance to or on behalf of a child creates a debt due and owing the state by the parent or parents responsible for the support of the child. The amount of the debt is the amount necessary to meet the total needs of the child or children and the person having custody, if included in the public assistance grant, as determined by the department in conformity with the federal Social Security Act; provided, however, that, where a court has ordered child support incident to a final divorce or in a criminal proceeding for nonsupport or where the responsible parent has entered into a legally enforceable and binding agreement, the debt created shall be equal to the amount set in such decree, order, hearing, or agreement. (b) The department, in accordance with rules established by the

Board of Human Services, shall be authorized to waive, reduce, or negotiate the payment of unreimbursed public assistance if it is determined that good cause for nonpayment exists or that enforcement of the claim would result in substantial and unreasonable hardship to the parent or parents responsible for the support of the child against whom the claim exists. The rules established by the Board of Human Services shall consider the ability of the responsible party to support the child or children during the period that public assistance was provided and the current history of regularity of payment by the responsible party. This subsection shall not apply to any court order or decree requiring the repayment of public assistance; however, the department is authorized to petition the court for consideration of a modification of an order or decree based on factors contained in this subsection and in the rules established by the Board of Human Services relating to such unreimbursed public assistance.

History

Ga. L. 1973, p. 192, § 4; Ga. L. 1976, p. 1537, § 4; Ga. L. 1977, p. 643, § 1; Ga. L. 2005, p. 1520, § 1/SB 52; Ga. L. 2009, p. 453, § 2-3/HB 228.

U.S. Code. The federal Social Security Act, referred to in this Code section, is codified at 42 U.S.C. § 301.

Annotations

JUDICIAL DECISIONS If there is an absent parent who does not provide support, and the payment of public assistance is for the support of both the dependent child and the custodial parent who is not able, without the benefit of public assistance, to provide support and maintenance for the child, it is inconsistent with both the goals of the Public Assistance Act and the Child Support Recovery Act, O.C.G.A. § 19-11-1 et seq., to conclude that the payment of Aid to Families with Dependent Children imposes upon the custodial parent a debt due and owing the state under O.C.G.A. § 1911-5. Cox v. Cox ex rel. State Dep’t of Human Resources, 255 Ga. 6, 334 S.E.2d 683, 1985 Ga. LEXIS 866 (1985). Repayment by custodial parent excuses non-custodial’s non-payment. - When uncontradicted evidence demonstrated that the custodial parent, the mother of two children, was entitled to public assistance and was repaying the state for public assistance which she received, the defendant, the children’s father, could not be held liable for those public assistance payments. Johnson v. Department of Human Resources, 204 Ga.

App. 23, 418 S.E.2d 401, 1992 Ga. App. LEXIS 659 (1992). Standing of department in claim against parent. - Even though a divorce decree between the mother and alleged father stated that the parties had no minor children, the department of human resources was not collaterally estopped from asserting a claim for child support benefits against the alleged father on behalf of the child. Department of Human Resources v. Fleeman, 263 Ga. 756, 439 S.E.2d 474, 1994 Ga. LEXIS 63 (1994). DHR entitled to default judgment. - Trial court erred in failing to enter a default judgment when in the court’s petition the Department of Human Resources alleged that it had provided support in the form of public assistance to the defendant’s daughter and was entitled to reimbursement. Department of Human Resources v. Hedgepath, 204 Ga. App. 755, 420 S.E.2d 638, 1992 Ga. App. LEXIS 978 (1992). Establishment of paternity. - Divorce decree, and the decree’s finding that the parties had no children, a finding which was apparently incorporated into

the decree simply because it was a provision of the parties’ agreement, was not a judicial proceeding establishing paternity within the meaning of “parent” in the Child Support Recovery Act, O.C.G.A. § 19-11-1 et seq. Department of Human Resources v. Fleeman, 263 Ga. 756, 439 S.E.2d 474, 1994 Ga. LEXIS 63 (1994). State was entitled to be reimbursed by the father for support payments made on the child’s behalf even though the father had not legitimated the child and had not been ordered to pay child support since it was undisputed that he was the father of the child and therefore had an obligation to support the child. Department of Human Resources v. Woodruff, 234 Ga. App. 513, 507 S.E.2d 249, 1998 Ga. App. LEXIS 1620 (1998). “Value of caretaking services” not to reduce debt. - In the computation of the debt due under O.C.G.A. § 19-11-5 et seq., a recipient is not entitled to a reduc-

tion of the debt for the value of his or her services as “caretaker” of the minor child. Cox v. Department of Human Resources, 174 Ga. App. 377, 330 S.E.2d 120, 1985 Ga. App. LEXIS 2708, rev’d, 255 Ga. 6, 334 S.E.2d 683, 1985 Ga. LEXIS 866 (1985). Application for appeal. - In an action for repayment of child support expended by the Department of Human Resources, the failure to file an application for appeal required under O.C.G.A. § 5-635(a)(2) did not result in dismissal of the appeal; an action for repayment under O.C.G.A. § 19-11-5 is one for collection of a debt and requiring discretionary appeal procedures only when the judgment is $2,500 or less, pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 56-35(a)(6). Department of Human Resources v. Johnson, 175 Ga. App. 610, 333 S.E.2d 845, 1985 Ga. App. LEXIS 2128 (1985).

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 20 cases, 1983–2007 · leading case: Cox v. Dep't of Human Resources, 334 S.E.2d 683 (Ga. 1985).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Cox v. Dep't of Human Resources, 334 S.E.2d 683 (Ga. 1985). · cites it 40× “The Child Support Recovery Act, OCGA § 19-11-5, provides: "The payment of public assistance to or on behalf of a child creates a debt due and owing the state by the parent or parents responsible for the support of the child. The amount of the debt is the amount necessary to meet…”
Fleeman v. Dep't of Human Resources, 430 S.E.2d 135 (Ga. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 18× “In March 1992, the state Department of Human Resources ("DHR") filed an action against James Fleeman pursuant to OCGA §§ 19-11-5 and 19-11-6, seeking to recover child support benefits paid on behalf of a child DHR alleged was fathered by Fleeman and to establish Fleeman's…”
Dep't of Human Resources v. Fleeman, 439 S.E.2d 474 (Ga. 1994). · cites it 7× “OCGA § 19-11-5. By accepting public assistance for or on behalf of a child or children .”
Neal v. State, 354 S.E.2d 664 (Ga. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 8× “It alleged that a debt had been created by the payment of public assistance under OCGA § 19-11-5 and that assignment to the department had occurred by virtue of OCGA § 19-11-6.”
Dep't of Human Resources v. Johnson, 333 S.E.2d 845 (Ga. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 8× “OCGA § 19-11-5 provides that "[t]he payment of public assistance to or on behalf of a child creates a debt due and owing the state by the parent or parents responsible for the support of the child.”
Burns v. Swinney, 314 S.E.2d 440 (Ga. 1984). · cites it 6× “OCGA § 19-11-5 (Code Ann. § 99-904b) provides: “The payment of public assistance to or on behalf of a child creates a debt due and owing the state by the parent or parents responsible for the support of the child.”
Dep't of Human Resources v. Ammons, 426 S.E.2d 901 (Ga. Ct. App. 1992). · cites it 4× “) OCGA § 19-11-5. As the result of the termination order, appellee is not a parent who is responsible for the support of his child.”
Dep't of Human Resources v. Woodruff, 507 S.E.2d 249 (Ga. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 4× “With respect to DHR’s ability to obtain reimbursement from Woodruff for past support payments made to the mother, OCGA § 19-11-5 provides that “[t]he payment of public assistance to or on behalf of a child creates a debt due and owing the state by the parent or parents…”
Fitzgerald v. Dep't of Human Resources, 497 S.E.2d 659 (Ga. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 2× “This is not an appeal from an action filed in the superior court to collect a debt due DHR under OCGA § 19-11-5 and requiring discretionary appeal procedures only when the judgment is $10,000 or less.”
Miller v. Charles, 439 S.E.2d 88 (Ga. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 2× “The complaint in the prior action, which is included in the record in this appeal, reveals that Charles accepted public assistance pursuant to OCGA § 19-11-5. Pursuant to OCGA § 19-11-6 (a), therefore, she is deemed to have assigned to DHR her right to child support, and DHR was…”
Cox v. Dep't of Human Resources, 330 S.E.2d 120 (Ga. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 26× “The trial court concluded as a matter of law that the debt created under OCGA § 19-11-5 upon the payment of public assistance is jointly and severally owed by both parents unless, and except to the extent, the duty of one parent has been otherwise or further defined by court…”
Kelley v. Dep't of Human Resources, 498 S.E.2d 741 (Ga. 1998). · cites it 2× “15 See OCGA §§ 19-11-5; 19-11-6 (a), (c). 16 See State v.”
Show all 20 citing cases →
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.