Syfert Injury Law Firm

Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation

Call Now: 904-383-7448

2018 Georgia Code 19-11-8 | Car Wreck Lawyer

Link to State of Georgia Official Statute 2018 Georgia Code Annotated (sourced from legal.resource.org)
O.C.G.A. 19-11-8 Case Law from Google Scholar Amendments to OCGA 19-11-8

TITLE 19 DOMESTIC RELATIONS

Section 11. Enforcement of Duty of Support, 19-11-1 through 19-11-191.

ARTICLE 1 CHILD SUPPORT RECOVERY ACT

19-11-8. (For effective date, see note.) Department's duty to enforce support of abandoned minor public assistance recipient; scope of action.

  1. Whenever the department receives an application for public assistance on behalf of a child and it appears that the child has been abandoned by one or both parents or that the responsible parent has failed to provide support to the child, it is the department's responsibility to take appropriate action under this article, the child support statutes, or other appropriate state and federal statutes to assure that the responsible parent supports the child.
  2. The department shall accept applications for child support enforcement services from a custodian of a minor child who is not a recipient of public assistance and shall take appropriate action under this article, the child support statutes, or other state and federal statutes to assure that the responsible parent supports the child. The department shall provide that a reasonable application fee be charged each individual who applies for services under this subsection. The department shall enforce an order for alimony so long as child support is being collected along with alimony and all provisions of subsection (d) of Code Section 19-11-6 are met.
  3. The department shall accept applications from noncustodial parents for services as provided for in this article and federal law and regulations. The department shall provide for a reasonable application fee for a noncustodial parent who applies for services under this subsection.
  4. Any action initiated by the department pursuant to subsection (a), (b), or (c) of this Code section shall be limited solely to the issue of support and shall exclude issues of visitation, custody, property settlement, or other similar matters otherwise joinable by the parties.
  5. (For effective date, see note.) The department shall be authorized to charge the obligor a federal Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 fee of $35.00 for each case. Such fee shall only apply to an obligor when the obligee has never received public assistance payments pursuant to Title IV-A or Title IV-E of the federal Social Security Act. The department shall retain such fee and collect such fee through income withholding, as well as by any other enforcement remedy available to the entity within the department authorized to enforce a duty of support.

(Ga. L. 1973, p. 192, § 7; Ga. L. 1976, p. 1537, § 6; Ga. L. 1982, p. 1207, §§ 2, 5; Ga. L. 1983, p. 1816, § 4; Ga. L. 1984, p. 567, § 1; Ga. L. 1985, p. 785, § 6; Ga. L. 1987, p. 186, § 4; Ga. L. 2003, p. 415, § 4; Ga. L. 2007, p. 667, § 2/SB 42; Ga. L. 2017, p. 646, § 1-18/SB 137; Ga. L. 2018, p. 937, § 2-2/SB 427.)

Delayed effective date.

- Subsection (e), as set out above, becomes effective October 1, 2018. For version of subsection (e) in effect until October 1, 2018, see the 2018 amendment note.

The 2017 amendment, effective October 1, 2017, substituted the present provisions of subsection (e) for the former provisions of subsections (e) and (f), which read: "(e) The department shall be authorized to charge the obligee a federal Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 fee of $12.00 to be paid at the rate of $1.00 per month after the IV-D agency has collected $500.00 of child support annually for each case. The department shall retain such fee and deduct such fee from child support collections before disbursement to the obligee. Such fee shall only apply to an obligee who has never received public assistance payments pursuant to Title IV-A or Title IV-E of the federal Social Security Act.

"(f) The department shall be authorized to charge the obligor a federal Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 fee of $13.00 to be paid in 12 monthly installments after the IV-D agency has collected $500.00 of child support annually for each case. Such fee shall only apply to an obligor when the obligee has never received public assistance payments pursuant to Title IV-A or Title IV-E of the federal Social Security Act. The department shall retain such fee and collect such fee through income withholding, as well as by any other enforcement remedy available to the IV-D agency responsible for child support enforcement."

The 2018 amendment, effective October 1, 2018, substituted "$35.00" for "$25.00" in the first sentence of subsection (e).

U.S. Code.

- Title IV-A of the federal Social Security Act, referred to in this Code section, is codified at 42 U.S.C. § 601 et seq.

Title IV-E of the federal Social Security Act, referred to in this Code section, is codified at 42 U.S.C. § 670 et seq.

Deficit Reduction Act of 2005, referred to in this Code section, is codified at Public Law 109-171, 120 Stat. 154.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

Impact of 2003 amendment.

- In the 2003 amendments to the Child Support Recovery Act, O.C.G.A. § 19-11-1 et seq., the General Assembly unambiguously broadened the legislature's intent, expressly permitting the Department of Human Resources to accept applications for child support services from non-custodial parents and to review, and even to seek downward modifications of, support awards under the provisions of the Act. Falkenberry v. Taylor, 278 Ga. 842, 607 S.E.2d 567 (2005).

State has a real interest in recovering payments by the state, which would not have been made had the responsible parent lived up to that parent's duty; and the purpose of Ga. L. 1976, p. 1537, §§ 5 and 6 (see now O.C.G.A. §§ 19-11-6 and19-11-8) is to secure that reimbursement. Department of Human Resources v. Bagley, 240 Ga. 306, 240 S.E.2d 867 (1977).

Action on behalf of child not receiving public assistance.

- Department of Human Resources is authorized to file modification actions on behalf of children who do not receive public assistance only in cases where the child's need for additional support can be shown; the Department is not authorized to seek modification of support on behalf of a child not receiving public assistance solely on the basis of a change in either parent's financial circumstances. Allen v. Georgia Dep't of Human Resources, 262 Ga. 521, 423 S.E.2d 383 (1992).

State's right to reimbursement continues although state fails to initiate action.

- To the extent that the state paid public assistance on behalf of the child which would not have been made had the responsible parent been current in paying that parent's support payments, the state is entitled under assignment provided for in Ga. L. 1976, p. 1537, § 5 (see now O.C.G.A. § 19-11-6) to be reimbursed for the state's excess payments out of support payments for that child recovered from the responsible parent, upon appropriate proof of the extent of the state's claim. This right continues even if the state fails to perform the state's duty to initiate the action under Ga. L. 1976, p. 1537, § 6 (see now O.C.G.A. § 19-11-8). Department of Human Resources v. Bagley, 240 Ga. 306, 240 S.E.2d 867 (1977).

Loss of right by department for failure to participate in action for recovery.

- Should Department of Human Resources fail to actively participate when joined by the custodial parent in action to recover support payments, the Department may lose the Department's claim for reimbursement. Department of Human Resources v. Bagley, 240 Ga. 306, 240 S.E.2d 867 (1977).

Custodial parent joining department in action.

- When custodial parent is forced to bring action to recover support payments by failure or refusal of state to do so, the proper procedure is for the custodian to join the Department of Human Resources as plaintiff to suit. Department of Human Resources v. Bagley, 240 Ga. 306, 240 S.E.2d 867 (1977).

Department joined in action must pay costs and fees.

- When the custodial parent is forced to bring an action to recover support payments by failure or refusal of the state to do so, the Department of Human Resources may recover the Department's reimbursement on condition that the Department agrees to reimburse the custodial parent for the costs of bringing the action, including reasonable attorney fees if approved by the court. Department of Human Resources v. Bagley, 240 Ga. 306, 240 S.E.2d 867 (1977).

Parent may cross-claim against Department of Human Resources for decision of what sums are due Department for reimbursement, if there is a dispute. Department of Human Resources v. Bagley, 240 Ga. 306, 240 S.E.2d 867 (1977).

Department's failure to follow procedures.

- The Department of Human Resources' filing of a petition to establish a child support obligation when one already existed under the divorce decree and the Department's failure to follow the specific procedures set forth in O.C.G.A. § 19-11-12 for modifying a child support obligation was not harmless error. Ward v. Department of Human Resources, 273 Ga. 52, 537 S.E.2d 70 (2000).

Order modified earlier support order in divorce case.

- Child support order entered in a case brought against a father by the Georgia Department of Human Resources on behalf of the couple's child seeking a child support modification limited the father's support obligation despite an earlier child support order entered in the divorce case. Louradour v. Britt, 278 Ga. 168, 598 S.E.2d 464 (2004).

Modification and domestication of foreign decree.

- Department of Human Resources was entitled to seek domestication of a foreign divorce decree in the source action in which modification of the decree was sought. Allen v. Georgia Dep't of Human Resources, 262 Ga. 521, 423 S.E.2d 383 (1992).

Cited in Young v. Department of Human Resources, 148 Ga. App. 518, 251 S.E.2d 578 (1978); Burns v. Swinney, 252 Ga. 461, 314 S.E.2d 440 (1984); Cox v. Cox ex rel. State Dep't of Human Resources, 255 Ga. 6, 334 S.E.2d 683 (1985).

OPINIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

Application fee for support recovery services.

- No application fee for child support recovery services should be charged under O.C.G.A. § 19-11-8. 1983 Op. Att'y Gen. No. U83-67.

RESEARCH REFERENCES

Am. Jur. 2d.

- 79 Am. Jur. 2d, Welfare Laws, § 79.

Cases Citing O.C.G.A. § 19-11-8

Total Results: 8  |  Sort by: Relevance  |  Newest First

Copy

Butler v. Turner, 555 S.E.2d 427 (Ga. 2001).

Cited 22 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Nov 19, 2001 | 274 Ga. 566, 2001 Fulton County D. Rep. 3481

...n holding that a parent who assigns to the Department of Human Resources (DHR) the parent's rights to seek child support as a condition of receiving benefits is in privity with the DHR in its action to establish a child support obligation under OCGA § 19-11-8; and (2) whether such parent may sue the other parent for fraud and deceit based on alleged misrepresentations made during the action to establish child support....
Copy

Dep't of Human Resources v. Allison, 575 S.E.2d 876 (Ga. 2003).

Cited 18 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Jan 13, 2003 | 276 Ga. 175, 2003 Fulton County D. Rep. 132

...lvement in this case. Allen is not direct authority for the trial court's ruling that DHR lacks standing. That case involved an attempt by DHR, in response to an application for child support enforcement services pursuant to OCGA §§ 19-11-6(c) and 19-11-8(b), to increase the amount of support for a child who was not receiving public assistance....
...support. Proof of the child's need for additional support clearly is not relevant to DHR's authority to seek a downward modification. DHR is not limited to representing parents whose children are receiving public assistance. OCGA §§ 19-11-6(c) and 19-11-8(b), enacted in response to Title IV-D of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C....
...Obviously, that purpose is not served by allowing DHR to *878 seek reductions in child support. Instead, the probability that the child will need public assistance increases if parental support decreases. If express provisions such as OCGA §§ 19-11-6 and 19-11-8 were deemed necessary to allow DHR to provide representation to the custodial parent of a child not on welfare, then a comparable express provision is surely necessary to allow DHR to represent the non-custodial parent of such a child. DHR contends that OCGA § 19-11-12 constitutes such a provision. Unlike OCGA §§ 19-11-6 and 19-11-8, OCGA § 19-11-12 "was enacted as part of the Child Support Recovery Act [cit.] in response to a federal mandate requiring each State to establish procedures for its child support agency to review and adjust certain child support orders....
...ld support order without regard to prior involvement of the IV-D agency. OCGA § 19-11-12 does not authorize the agency to review a child support order unless it had some pre-existing involvement in obtaining the order pursuant to OCGA § 19-11-6 or § 19-11-8....
...Even the wealthiest parent of the richest child could simply turn to DHR, regardless of the absence of any previous involvement by that agency, and request legal representation. In the absence of an express statute comparable to OCGA §§ 19-11-6(c) and 19-11-8(b), DHR's authority to bring a downward modification action under OCGA § 19-11-12 is limited to cases in which there is a prior court order which establishes or enforces a child support obligation and which DHR participated in obtaining....
Copy

Allen v. Georgia Dep't of Human Resources, 423 S.E.2d 383 (Ga. 1992).

Cited 18 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Nov 16, 1992 | 262 Ga. 521

...512, 514, 330 S.E.2d 341 (1985). We granted the appellant's application to appeal the trial court's denial of the motion to dismiss. The appellant first argues, in substance, that an action for domestication is not within the statutory authority of the DHR under OCGA § 19-11-8, [2] and that therefore the DHR lacks standing to bring this modification action....
...horized to bring an action on behalf of the appellant's two minor children to modify his support obligation to them," Scruggs, supra at 589, and we affirmed the trial court's denial of the appellant's motion to dismiss the DHR's complaint. OCGA *523 § 19-11-8 (b), although not relied on in Scruggs, supports the holding that the DHR is entitled to bring a modification action because a modification action is an "appropriate action ......
...Nevertheless, for the reasons that follow, we affirm the trial court's denial of appellant's motion to dismiss. First, the DHR is not only authorized, but is required to accept applications from a custodian of a minor child who is not a recipient of public assistance. OCGA § 19-11-8 (b). See also OCGA § 19-11-6 (c). However, we interpret OCGA § 19-11-8 (b) to authorize DHR to file modification actions on behalf of children who do not receive public assistance only in cases where DHR can show the child's need for additional support....
...egree, stands in the shoes of the party seeking support. [5] However, we do not believe the Legislature intended to give DHR the power to seek modification of support to the same extent a parent may do so. Rather, the legislative history behind OCGA § 19-11-8 indicates an intent to authorize DHR to pursue appropriate action to assure adequate support from the responsible parent of a minor child not receiving public assistance, in order to prevent the child's family from having to apply for public assistance....
...determination that a responsible parent is able to support his children; and (3) To provide for the enforcement of an able parent's obligation to furnish support. (b) This article shall be liberally construed to promote its underlying purposes. OCGA § 19-11-8 (b) provides that *526 [t]he [DHR] shall accept applications for child support enforcement services from a custodian of a minor child who is not a recipient of public assistance and shall take appropriate action under this article, the chi...
...[Emphasis supplied.] The majority has required the DHR to allege that the child is in need of additional support in a modification action brought on behalf of a child who does not receive public assistance. The only reason given by the majority for this requirement is that the legislative history of OCGA § 19-11-8 (b) "indicates an intent to authorize [the] DHR to pursue appropriate action to assure adequate support from the responsible parent of a minor child not receiving public assistance, in order to prevent the child's family from having to apply for public assistance." (Majority p....
...524.) [9] The literal words of the statute, however, prohibit such a construction. Rather, the statute clearly requires the DHR to "take appropriate action under this article, the child support statutes, or other state and federal statutes to assure that the responsible parent supports the child." OCGA § 19-11-8 (b)....
...Thus, the literal language of the statute permits the DHR to bring a modification action on behalf of a minor child not receiving public assistance based solely upon a change in the financial ability of the spouse making payments. Moreover, the plain language of OCGA § 19-11-8 contains no requirement that would restrict the DHR to filing a modification action on behalf of a child only if there has been a change in the child's needs. *527 Furthermore, the majority's statement of legislative intent actually contradicts its limiting construction of § 19-11-8....
...When made, this application to the [DHR] shall constitute an assignment of the right to support to the [DHR] and the proceeds of any collections resulting from such application shall be distributed in accordance with the standards prescribed in the federal Social Security Act. [2] OCGA § 19-11-8 states, in part: (b) The [DHR] shall accept applications for child support enforcement services from a custodian of a minor child who is not a recipient of public assistance and shall take appropriate action under this article, the child s...
...See OCGA § 19-6-19 (a). [5] It would appear the father should be able to raise against DHR whatever claims and defenses he might have had against the mother, including a right to seek attorney fees and expenses, if appropriate, under OCGA § 19-6-19 (d). [6] OCGA § 19-11-8, which, before 1985, gave DHR discretion to accept applications for enforcement services from parents of minor children not receiving public assistance, was amended in 1985 to require DHR to accept such applications....
...but "whose court-ordered provider enjoys an enhanced financial status." (Majority p. 524, fn. 7) Of course, the private bar is as essential to the enforcement of child support orders as it is in other litigation. However, the plain language of OCGA § 19-11-8 imposes no requirement of a change in need before a custodial parent is entitled to the option of requesting that the DHR file a modification action on behalf of his or her child....
Copy

Burns v. Swinney, 314 S.E.2d 440 (Ga. 1984).

Cited 12 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Apr 18, 1984 | 252 Ga. 461

...e 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." [2] *463 OCGA § 19-11-8 (a) (Code Ann....
Copy

Cox v. Dep't of Human Resources, 334 S.E.2d 683 (Ga. 1985).

Cited 5 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Oct 1, 1985 | 255 Ga. 6

...The DHR is given broad authority under the CSRA to determine whether the parent is able to support the child. OCGA § 19-11-10. If the DHR determines the parent is so able, it is authorized to take appropriate action to ensure that the parent supports the child. OCGA § 19-11-8....
Copy

Ward v. Dep't of Human Resources, 537 S.E.2d 70 (Ga. 2000).

Cited 4 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Oct 2, 2000 | 273 Ga. 52, 2000 Fulton County D. Rep. 3780

...neous. 2. We cannot agree, however, with the Court of Appeals' conclusion that DHR's failure to follow the statutory procedures set forth in OCGA § 19-11-12 for the modification of an existing child support obligation was harmless error. Under OCGA § 19-11-8(b), DHR is required to accept applications for child support enforcement services from a custodian of a minor child who is not a recipient of public assistance....
...OCGA § 19-11-12 sets forth the review procedures to be followed by DHR when reviewing for possible modification both administratively and judicially imposed child support orders. OCGA § 19-11-12(b), (c) and (d). By establishing the procedures to be followed by DHR in modification actions authorized under OCGA § 19-11-8(b), OCGA § 19-11-12 is a statute in pari materia with OCGA § 19-11-8 and must be read in conjunction with those opinions which have interpreted it. Thus, we find controlling in this case our opinion in Allen v. Department of Human Resources, 262 Ga. 521, 523(2), 423 S.E.2d 383 (1992), in which we interpreted OCGA § 19-11-8(b) to authorize DHR to file modification actions on behalf of children not receiving public assistance only in cases where DHR can show the child's need for additional support....
Copy

Falkenberry v. Taylor, 607 S.E.2d 567 (Ga. 2005).

Cited 3 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Jan 10, 2005 | 278 Ga. 842, 2005 Fulton County D. Rep. 130

...y to prove a need for an increase in child support payments, in light of the 2003 amendments to the Child Support Recovery Act (Act). OCGA §§ 19-11-1 et seq. This Court's holding in Allen was based on the apparent legislative intent of former OCGA § 19-11-8 to "authorize DHR to pursue appropriate action to assure adequate support from the responsible parent of a minor child not receiving public assistance, in order to prevent the child's family from having to apply for public assistance." Allen v....
...itting DHR to accept applications for child support services from non-custodial parents and to review, and even to seek downward modifications of, support awards under the provisions of the Act, including OCGA § 19-11-12. OCGA §§ 19-11-6(e), *569 19-11-8(c). Furthermore, OCGA §§ 19-11-6 and 19-11-8 must be read in conjunction with OCGA § 19-11-12, which "sets forth the review procedures to be followed by DHR when reviewing for possible modification both administratively and judicially imposed child support orders....
Copy

Louradour v. Britt, 278 Ga. 168 (Ga. 2004).

Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Jun 14, 2004 | 598 S.E.2d 464, 2004 Fulton County D. Rep. 1960

...order. . . .” Id. at 2. The 1994 order at issue here was not the result of an administrative proceeding conducted by DHR, but was a civil action brought by DHR. See Allen, supra, 262 Ga. 521 (1), where this Court held DHR was authorized under OCGA § 19-11-8 (b) to bring an action seeking upward modification of a child support obligation imposed by a final judgment and decree of divorce on behalf of a child not receiving public assistance....