The Minnesota Supreme Court was recently asked whether a ‘handshake’ agreement between parents to pay support for their child is enforceable in Minnesota. Their answer was … “no”. This announcement should be alarming to parents paying child support out of compliance with their child support orders. Why, dear reader? Do read on!
In the instant case, filed under the caption Sheehy Lee v. Kalis, the parents had a court order directing Parent A to pay Parent B, $1145 per month. The parents later agreed to lower that amount to $1000 per month, then later to $500 per month; never alerting the Court to this agreement.
Years later, Parent B decided – despite this agreement – to collect unpaid support from Parent A, alleging that Parent A should have been paying the $1,145 all along, and was now behind to the tune of $30,000!
The Child Support Magistrate and the Court of Appeals initially denied this request, explaining that the parents had a deal, or in legal-speak, an “implied-in-fact contract”. Parent A should not be on the hook for $30,000 of unpaid child support, or so said the lower courts. Parent B then asked the Minnesota Supreme Court to consider whether a parent could lower child support, even by agreement, without a court order.
In response, the Supreme Court cited a federal law passed in 1986, called the Bradley Amendment (42 USC §666(a)(9)). According to this law, child support orders cannot be modified without court-approval. Because forgiving $30,000 of unpaid child support would retroactively modify a child support award, prohibited by the Bradley Amendment, the parents’ agreement was of no effect.
Congress passed the Bradley Amendment to make sure child support was getting paid to children. Minnesota receives about 2/3 of its funding for child support programs from the federal government. And so, the Bradley Amendment compelled Minnesota to update its child support laws to say that modifications may only be made back to the date that the request is filed with the Court. Minn. Stat. §518A.39 subd. 2(f)
Because the parents in our case didn’t let the Court in on their agreement, their agreement was of no effect. Had the parents alerted the court and sought approval, Parent A would not likely be on the hook for $30,000.
When it comes to the support of children, the law in Minnesota says that an order is an order, until the court – not the parents – say otherwise.
If parents have questions about the enforcement or modification of their child support obligation, please seek the advice of competent legal counsel.
1 It should be noted that the facts of the case referenced herein involved no handshakes, high-fives, nods of approval, winks, nudges or other physical manifestations of accord, other than the actions of the parties, suggesting a mutual assent to a course of conduct.
2 Note: complete case caption is Leslie E. Sheehy Lee, Appellant, vs. Travis W. Kalis. Respondent, County of Le Sueur, File No. A23-0522.
Meet Tim Simonson
Tim has been practicing for more than twenty (20) years now, He's handled divorce, child support, child custody, third party and grandparent rights, domestic abuse, parenting time, and many other areas of family law. He always enjoys the chance to meet people and see whether he can help find solutions to their legal problems.
Contact Beyer & Simonson
If you are facing divorce and any of the divorce-related issues such as spousal maintenance, child support, child custody, property division, or domestic abuse matters, you need our experienced Minneapolis divorce attorneys to help you. Contact Beyer & Simonson in Edina, Minnesota today at (952) 303-6007.
