Krieger v. Teut, A-22-586

Andrew J. Krieger and Ashley C. Teut, who were never married, have two children together and litigated paternity, custody, and child support in Nebraska.
In April 2019, the parties reached an agreement on joint legal and physical custody and stipulated to calculating child support using Worksheet 1 (basic calculation), even though joint custody generally defaults to Worksheet 3 under Nebraska guidelines.
Significant delays and disputes arose over the proper calculation of Ashley’s income, particularly relating to large deposits in her bank account and whether they should be included as income.
In 2022, a hearing was held where the parties agreed to rely on the 2019 record for all matters except to argue child support calculations; both parties presented evidence and argument concerning income and guideline deviations.
The district court entered a decree adopting Andrew’s proposed income calculations, finding that using Worksheet 1 (per the original agreement) served the best interests of the children, and required Andrew to pay $1,065/month for two children.
Andrew appealed, raising issues with the calculation of Ashley’s income, the use of Worksheet 1, the court’s refusal to reopen the trial, and partial enforcement of the agreement.

Issue	Krieger's Argument	Teut's Argument	Held
Calculation of Ashley's Income	Court should include large account deposits as income	Deposits were loans, not income, properly excluded	Court acted within discretion excluding them as non-income
Use of Worksheet 1 vs. Worksheet 3	Court should use Worksheet 3 for joint custody	Parties agreed to Worksheet 1; original agreement stands	Court enforced agreement; use of Worksheet 1 affirmed
Refusal to Reopen Matter for Trial	Court erred in not reopening trial to address new evidence	Parties agreed to argue based on 2019 record, with new evidence on income	Court did not abuse discretion; Krieger had opportunity to present
Partial Enforcement of Agreement	Court enforced only parts of the agreement, prejudicing Krieger	(No substantive argument provided)	Not addressed—issue not specifically argued in brief

State on behalf of A.E. v. Buckhalter, 273 Neb. 443 (Neb. 2007) (standard for appellate review of child support determinations is abuse of discretion)
Lasu v. Issak, 23 Neb. App. 83 (Neb. Ct. App. 2015) (court may deviate from child support guidelines if unjust or inappropriate)