Syfert Injury Law Firm

Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation

Call Now: 904-383-7448

2018 Georgia Code 19-6-32 | Car Wreck Lawyer

Link to State of Georgia Official Statute 2018 Georgia Code Annotated (sourced from legal.resource.org)
O.C.G.A. 19-6-32 Case Law from Google Scholar Amendments to OCGA 19-6-32

TITLE 19 DOMESTIC RELATIONS

Section 6. Alimony and Child Support, 19-6-1 through 19-6-53.

ARTICLE 1 GENERAL PROVISIONS

19-6-32. Entering income deduction order or medical support notice for award of child support; when order or notice effective; hearing on order.

  1. As used in this Code section, the term:
    1. "Child support enforcement agency" means the entity within the Department of Human Services and its contractors that are authorized to enforce a duty of support.
    2. "Court" means judge of any court of record or an administrative law judge of the Office of State Administrative Hearings.
    3. "Earnings" means any form of payment due to an individual, regardless of source, including without limitation wages, salary, commission, bonus, workers' compensation, disability, payments pursuant to a pension or retirement program, and interest.
    4. "IV-D" means Title IV-D of the federal Social Security Act.
    5. "National Medical Support Notice" means a notice as prescribed under 42 U.S.C. Section 666(a)(19) or a substantially similar notice.
    6. "Obligee" means the individual to whom the payment of a support obligation is owed.
    7. "Obligor" means the individual owing a duty of support.
    8. "Payor" means the person that provides earnings to an obligor.
    1. Except as provided for in paragraph (1) of subsection (c) of this Code section, upon the entry of a judgment or order establishing, enforcing, or modifying a child support obligation or spousal support obligation through a court, a separate income deduction order, if one has not been previously entered, shall be entered. If the obligee is an applicant for child support services under IV-D, the obligee shall furnish copies of the support order and the income deduction order to the child support enforcement agency.
    2. For all child support orders, and spousal support orders enforced pursuant to subsection (d) of Code Section 19-11-6, the child support enforcement agency shall be authorized to issue an income deduction order without need for any amendment to the order involved or any further action by a court that issued it, provided that an opportunity for a hearing before a court is afforded. The child support enforcement agency shall also be authorized to issue a National Medical Support Notice to enforce the medical support provisions of such orders, provided that an opportunity for a hearing pursuant to Code Section 19-11-27 is afforded. Such orders or notices may be issued electronically by the child support enforcement agency. The child support enforcement agency shall issue an income deduction order or, when appropriate, a National Medical Support Notice within two business days after the information regarding a newly hired employee is entered into the centralized employee registry pursuant to Code Section 19-11-9.2 and matched with an obligor in a case being enforced by the child support enforcement agency.
      1. All child support orders which are initially issued in this state on or after January 1, 1994, and are not at the time of issuance being enforced by the child support enforcement agency shall provide for the immediate withholding of such support from the earnings of the individual required by that order to furnish support unless:
        1. A court issuing the order finds there is good cause not to require such immediate withholding; or
        2. A written agreement is reached between both parties which provides for an alternative arrangement.
      2. For purposes of this subsection, any finding that there is good cause not to require withholding from earnings shall be based on at least a written determination that implementing such withholding would not be in the best interest of the child and proof of timely payment of previously ordered support in cases involving modification of support orders.
    2. All child support orders which are not described in subsection (b) of this Code section or in paragraph (1) of this subsection shall, upon petition of either party to revise such order under Code Section 19-6-19 or to enforce such order under Code Section 19-6-28, be revised to include provisions for withholding such support from the earnings of the individual required by the order to furnish such support if arrearages equal to one month's support accrue but without the necessity of filing application for services under Code Section 19-11-6.
    3. Copies of income deduction orders issued under this subsection shall be provided by the obligee to the obligor, payor, and the family support registry established pursuant to Code Section 19-6-33.1.
  4. An income deduction order shall:
    1. Direct a payor to deduct from all earnings due and payable to an obligor the amount required by the support order to meet the obligor's support obligation;
    2. State the amount of arrearage accrued, if any, under the support order and direct a payor to withhold an additional amount until the arrearage is paid in full;
    3. Direct a payor not to deduct in excess of the amounts allowed under Section 303(b) of the federal Consumer Credit Protection Act, 15 U.S.C. Section 1673(b); and
    4. Direct the payor to send income deduction order payments, including administrative fees authorized by law, to the family support registry established pursuant to Code Section 19-6-33.1.
  5. Income deduction orders shall be effective immediately unless a court upon good cause shown finds that the income deduction order shall be effective upon a delinquency in an amount equal to one month's support or a written agreement is reached between both parties which provides for an alternative arrangement.
  6. An income deduction order shall be effective so long as the order of support upon which it is based is effective or until further order of a court.
  7. When an income deduction order shall be effective immediately, the obligee or child support enforcement agency, as applicable, shall furnish to the obligor a statement of his or her rights, remedies, and duties in regard to the income deduction order. The statement shall state:
    1. All fees or interest which shall be imposed;
    2. The total amount of earnings to be deducted for each pay period until the arrearage, if any, is paid in full and the total amount of earnings to be deducted for each pay period thereafter. The amounts deducted shall not be in excess of that allowed under Section 303(b) of the federal Consumer Credit Protection Act, 15 U.S.C. Section 1673(b);
    3. When the withholding will commence;
    4. That the income deduction order shall apply to current and subsequent payors and periods of employment;
    5. That a copy of the income deduction order shall be provided to the payors;
    6. That the enforcement of the income deduction order may only be contested on the ground of mistake of fact regarding the amount of support owed pursuant to a support order, the arrearages, or the identity of the obligor;
    7. How to contest the withholding; and
    8. That the obligor is required to notify the obligee and, when the obligee is receiving IV-D services, the child support enforcement agency, within seven days of changes in the obligor's address and payors and the addresses of his or her payors.
  8. When an income deduction order is effective upon a delinquency in an amount equal to one month's support, or when an order for spousal or child support was in effect prior to July 1, 1989, the obligee or child support enforcement agency, as applicable, may enforce the income deduction order by providing a notice of delinquency to the obligor. A notice of delinquency shall state:
    1. The terms of the support order;
    2. The period of delinquency and the total amount of the delinquency as of the date the notice is mailed;
    3. All fees or interest which may be imposed;
    4. The total amount of earnings to be deducted for each pay period until the arrearage and all applicable fees and interest are paid in full and the total amount of earnings to be deducted for each pay period thereafter. The amounts deducted shall not be in excess of that allowed under Section 303(b) of the federal Consumer Credit Protection Act, 15 U.S.C. Section 1673(b);
    5. That a copy of the notice of delinquency shall be provided to the payors, together with a copy of the income deduction order. The obligor may apply to a court to contest enforcement of the order once the notice of delinquency has been received. The application shall not affect the enforcement of the income deduction order until a court enters an order granting relief to the obligor;
    6. That the enforcement of the income deduction order may only be contested on the ground of mistake of fact regarding the amount of support owed pursuant to a support order, the arrearages, or the identity of the obligor; and
    7. That the obligor is required to notify the obligee of the obligor's current address and current payors and the address of current payors. All changes shall be reported by the obligor within seven days of the change occurring. If the child support enforcement agency is enforcing such order, the obligor shall make these notifications to the child support enforcement agency instead of to the obligee.
  9. The failure of the obligor to receive the notice of delinquency provided for in subsection (h) of this Code section shall not preclude the income deduction order being subsequently provided to the payor. A notice of delinquency which fails to state an arrearage shall not mean that an arrearage is not owed.
  10. At any time, any party, including the child support enforcement agency, may apply to a court to:
    1. Modify, suspend, or terminate the income deduction order because of a modification, suspension, or termination of the underlying order for support; or
    2. Modify the amount of earnings being withheld when the arrearage has been paid.

(Code 1981, §19-6-32, enacted by Ga. L. 1989, p. 861, § 3;Ga. L. 1991, p. 94, § 19; Ga. L. 1991, p. 950, § 1; Ga. L. 1993, p. 585, § 1; Ga. L. 1997, p. 1613, § 11; Ga. L. 1999, p. 1237, § 1; Ga. L. 2002, p. 1247, § 2; Ga. L. 2017, p. 646, § 1-13/SB 137.)

The 2017 amendment, effective July 1, 2017, rewrote this Code section.

U.S. Code.

- Title IV-D of the federal Social Security Act, referred to in this Code section, is codified at 42 U.S.C. § 651 et seq.

Administrative Rules and Regulations.

- Garnishment and orders to withhold and deliver, Official Compilation of the Rules and Regulations of the State of Georgia, Office of Child Support Recovery, Recovery and administration of child support, § 290-7-1-.09.

Law reviews.

- For article commenting on the 1997 amendment of this Code section, see 14 Ga. St. U.L. Rev. 121 (1997). For note on 1989 enactment of this Code section, see 6 Ga. St. U.L. Rev. 227 (1989). For note on 1993 amendment of this Code section, see 10 Ga. St. U.L. Rev. 118 (1993).

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

Constitutionality.

- O.C.G.A. § 19-6-32 does not violate the separation of powers doctrine. Georgia Dep't of Human Resources v. Word, 265 Ga. 461, 458 S.E.2d 110 (1995).

Construction.

- Language of O.C.G.A. § 19-6-32 plainly mandates income-deduction orders. Georgia Dep't of Human Resources v. Pernice, 260 Ga. 732, 399 S.E.2d 65 (1991).

When the Department of Human Resources obtained a judgment after July 1, 1989, enforcing appellee's obligation to pay child support, the trial court should have entered a separate income deduction order pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 19-6-32(a)(1). Department of Human Resources v. Chappell, 211 Ga. App. 834, 440 S.E.2d 722 (1994).

Under O.C.G.A. § 19-6-32(a)(1), when any court order or judgment entered on or after July 1, 1989, establishes support obligations for the first time, or enforces existing obligations, or modifies such obligations, the court "shall" order income deduction pursuant to the procedure established in 1989 if the child support recovery agency seeks such. Department of Human Resources v. Offutt, 217 Ga. App. 823, 459 S.E.2d 597 (1995).

Since the original court order regarding support was entered prior to July 1, 1989, before the advent of statutorily mandated income deduction, under O.C.G.A. § 19-6-32(a)(2), the trial court was authorized to use the court's discretion in determining whether to order income deduction. Department of Human Resources v. Offutt, 217 Ga. App. 823, 459 S.E.2d 597 (1995).

When issuance of income deduction order required.

- When the Department of Human Resources petitioned to modify a divorce decree so that the former husband's child support payments would be made directly to the child support receiver, the issuance of an income deduction order was required based on the former wife's receipt of public assistance. Department of Human Resources v. Brandenburg, 211 Ga. App. 715, 440 S.E.2d 498 (1994), overruled on other grounds, Department of Human Servs. v. Offutt, 217 Ga. App. 823, 459 S.E.2d 597 (1995).

"Good cause" for delaying the effective date of an income deduction order is the exception and should be found cautiously and only under narrow circumstances. In no case is the fact that the obligated parent is current in the parent's support obligation, in itself, good cause. Georgia Dep't of Human Resources v. Word, 265 Ga. 461, 458 S.E.2d 110 (1995).

Cited in Department of Human Resources v. Wood, 219 Ga. App. 778, 466 S.E.2d 663 (1996).

Cases Citing O.C.G.A. § 19-6-32

Total Results: 2  |  Sort by: Relevance  |  Newest First

Copy

Georgia Dep't of Human Resources v. Word, 265 Ga. 461 (Ga. 1995).

Cited 8 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Jun 12, 1995 | 458 S.E.2d 110

...seq. Following a hearing the trial court declined to hold Word in contempt, finding among other mitigating circumstances that Word had paid the arrearage. Further, the trial court refused to enter an income deduction order holding, sua sponte, OCGA § 19-6-32 (a), which requires mandatory income deduction orders in certain child support cases, unconstitutional because it violates the doctrine of separation of powers. [1] We granted DHR's application to appeal and we reverse and remand because the legislature, in establishing mandatory income deduction orders in child support cases, infringed neither on judicial authority nor function. OCGA § 19-6-32 (a) states that on application to DHR and on entry of a judgment of child support in a case in which DHR is involved, the court "shall enter a separate order for income deduction if one has not been entered." [2] The order directs the empl...
...support. To the extent the legislature has established judicial action as part of that plan, it has not improperly infringed on *464 any judicial function. [13] 2. The income deduction provisions of the Code state that income deduction orders under § 19-6-32 (a) become effective immediately unless the court "upon good cause shown" finds that it "shall be effective upon the delinquency in an amount equal to one month's support" or unless the parties agree otherwise. OCGA § 19-6-32 (c). The trial court correctly construed this section as providing a delayed trigger for the implementation of the order, not affecting the trial court's duty to enter the order in the first instance. Because the trial court held § 19-6-32 (a) unconstitutional, it did not reach the issue of whether Word showed good cause so that the effective date of the order should be delayed....
...[14] However, in no case is the fact that the obligated parent is current in his or her support obligation, in itself, "good cause." [15] For the above reasons, we reverse and remand this case to the trial court to issue an income deduction order under OCGA § 19-6-32 (a) which order shall be effective immediately unless the trial court determines in accordance with this opinion that Word has demonstrated good cause to delay implementation....
...nder certain circumstances. OCGA § 19-6-33. [2] DHR's involvement under OCGA § 19-11-6 results either from its payment of public assistance on behalf of the child, or a party's application to DHR for assistance in collection of child support. OCGA § 19-6-32 (a) became effective July 1, 1989 and limited mandatory income deduction orders to DHR-related cases. However, the federal legislation requiring states to implement payroll deduction orders in DHR-related cases also provided that states require the same provision in non-DHR cases by January 1, 1994. Accordingly, the 1994 amendment to OCGA § 19-6-32 (a) requires that all child support orders issued after January 1, 1994 not being enforced under OCGA § 19-6-32 (a) — that is, all child support orders — provide for immediate withholding of support from the wages of the parent required to furnish support except under limited circumstances. OCGA § 19-6-32 (a.1). Although the provisions of § 19-6-32 (a) and (a.1) are similar, this case is a DHR-related one under § 19-6-32 (a). [3] OCGA § 19-6-32 (b)....
...Sheppard v. Money, 529 NE2d 542, 545 (Ill. 1988). [6] In Ga. Dept. of Human Resources v. Pernice, 260 Ga. 732 (399 SE2d 65) (1991) in which we were not called upon to address a constitutional challenge, we held the income deduction order under OCGA § 19-6-32 (a) (1) is mandatory....
...Harper, 220 Ga. 582 (140 SE2d 844) (1965), upholding against a separation of powers challenge the child selection provision of Ga. L. 1962 (now OCGA § 19-9-1) (a)) allowing a 14-year-old to select the parent with whom he or she desires to live. [14] See OCGA § 19-6-32 (a.1) (1)....
Copy

Georgia Dep't of Human Resources v. Pernice, 399 S.E.2d 65 (Ga. 1991).

Cited 7 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Jan 9, 1991 | 260 Ga. 732

...Bowers, Attorney General, William C. Joy, Senior Assistant Attorney General, William M. Droze, Assistant Attorney General, for appellant. Peter Pernice, pro se. BELL, Justice. This appeal concerns whether a trial court is required to enter an income-deduction order pursuant to OCGA § 19-6-32 (a) (1), [1] in a child-support recovery action brought by the Georgia Department of Human Resources (DHR)....
...Appellee failed to pay any support, and in 1989 the DHR, pursuant to the Child Support Recovery Act, OCGA § 19-11-11 to § 19-11-26, filed a motion for contempt against appellee and, in addition, requested that the court enter an income-deduction order pursuant to § 19-6-32 (a) (1). OCGA § 19-6-32 (a) (1) provides that after a child-support agency has obtained a judgment "establishing, enforcing, or modifying a child support obligation ..., the court shall enter a separate order for income deduction if one has not been entered." In...
...o pay his support obligations. However, the court ruled that income-deduction orders are not mandatory, and declined the DHR's request to impose one in this case. The DHR appeals, contending that income-deduction orders are mandatory. We agree. OCGA § 19-6-32 (a) (1) provides that, in a child-support recovery action, a trial court "shall enter" an income-deduction order. The language of § 19-6-32 thus plainly mandates income-deduction orders....
...NOTES [1] An income-deduction order is directed to the employer of a person obligated to provide child support. The order requires the employer to deduct from the employee's income an amount set by the court to meet the employee's support obligation, including arrearages. See §§ 19-6-32; 19-6-33.