Moye, L. v. Njie, B.
1591 EDA 2015
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Jul 6, 2016Background
- Father (Bakary Njie) and Mother (Lucretia Moye) are parents of a child subject to a Pennsylvania support order entered in 2004; Mother and child lived in Pennsylvania, Father lived in Georgia/Atlanta.
- Georgia terminated the support case on November 17, 2008 and set arrears to zero; Pennsylvania later administratively reinstated the Pennsylvania order on April 19, 2012 as the Georgia termination was deemed erroneous.
- Father was shot in 2011, became permanently disabled, and began receiving Social Security Disability Income (SSDI); a retroactive lump-sum SSDI payment was later garnished by Pennsylvania DRO.
- The support order terminated as a running order when the child turned 18 (effective November 17, 2014), but an arrears-only order remained with accumulated arrears over $50,000 and a monthly arrears payment set at $645.48.
- Father filed petitions for special relief seeking (inter alia) review of Georgia’s authority to terminate, modification of support retroactive to his disability, remission of arrears or reduction tied to SSR/SSDI, and designation as complex to allow discovery; trial court held a hearing (Father absent by phone), denied most relief but ordered an audit and reduced monthly arrears payments to $300.
- On appeal, the Superior Court affirmed, finding many issues waived or without merit, concluding Georgia lacked authority to modify the Pennsylvania order under UIFSA, and that Father failed to meet the standard for remission or to preserve evidence at the hearing.
Issues
| Issue | Njie (Father) Argument | Moye (Mother) Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Georgia validly terminated the PA support order and whether PA properly reinstated it | Georgia as responding tribunal had authority to terminate or modify the order; PA reinstatement was erroneous | Georgia lacked authority because Mother and child remained in PA; PA could reinstate | Waived/without merit: Georgia lacked authority under UIFSA; PA properly reinstated order |
| Whether Father could introduce SSDI evidence and whether arrears should be discharged or reduced below SSR | SSDI income makes arrears/payment exceed SSR; evidence should be admitted and arrears remitted or reduced | Father did not present SSDI documents at hearing; remission requires inability to pay and no prospect of payment | Denied: Father failed to offer evidence at hearing and did not meet remission standard; court reduced monthly arrears to $300 |
| Whether case should be designated complex to allow discovery into Mother’s income changes since 2004 | Case is complex; discovery needed to evaluate modification | Running/support modification was not at issue; matter was arrears-only and Father had verifiable SSDI income | Denied: designation unnecessary; discovery not warranted for arrears-only matter |
| Whether trial court abused discretion or applied laches regarding issues raised | Trial court improperly relied on laches and foreclosed review | Issues were waived by Father’s failure to raise them at hearing; laches referenced only in other context | Denied: issues waived for not being raised at trial; no abuse of discretion shown |
Key Cases Cited
- Summers v. Summers, 35 A.3d 786 (Pa. Super. 2012) (standard for reversing family court support determinations)
- Krebs v. Krebs, 944 A.2d 768 (Pa. Super. 2008) (abuse-of-discretion standard in family law review)
- Commonwealth v. Preston, 904 A.2d 1 (Pa. Super. 2006) (appellant’s responsibility to provide a complete certified record)