347 P.3d 1033
Kan. Ct. App.2015Background
- Daniel Phillips appeals a district court enforcement of Washington-derived child-support arrearage orders in Kansas, arguing Washington’s 10-year limit should apply.
- The orders at issue include unpaid child support, interest, attorney fees, and medical expenses.
- UIFSA governs interstate enforcement; Kansas statute K.S.A. 2014 Supp. 23-36,604 governs duration for current payments and arrearages and selects the longer limitations period in arrearage proceedings.
- UIFSA defines 'support order' to include not only basic child support but also arrearages, interest, fees, and related costs, making all sums part of an arrearage proceeding.
- The court evaluates whether this is a proceeding for arrearages, which would trigger the longer limitations period between Kansas and the issuing state (Washington).
- The district court previously held various sums dormant or collectible under Kansas dormancy/limitations; the current ruling clarifies the arrearage framework and dormancy implications.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the case is a proceeding for arrearages under UIFSA | Phillips contends not arrearages under UIFSA. | Kimbra argues sums fall within arrearages under the order. | Yes; sums are arrearages under UIFSA. |
| Which state's limitation period governs arrearages under UIFSA | Washington limit should apply as the issuing state. | Kansas longer-period applies under UIFSA when arrearages exist. | Kansas longer period applies. |
Key Cases Cited
- Hale v. Hale, 33 Kan. App. 2d 769 (2005) ( UIFSA choice-of-law applied to dormancy statutes)
- In re Metcalf Associates-Co., 2000, 42 Kan. App. 2d 412 (2009) (dormant-judgment treated as a statute of limitations under UIFSA)
- In re Marriage of Owen, 126 Wash. App. 487 (2005) (Washington enforcement of Kansas order; related jurisdictional issues)
- In re Marriage of Phillips, 2005 WL 475240 (2005) (unpublished; noted but not an official reporter citation for reporting purposes)
- Gordon v. Gordon, 218 Kan. 686 (1976) (acquiescence doctrine; waiver of appeal rights requires more than payments)