(1) A party contesting the validity or enforcement of a registered support order or seeking to vacate the registration has the burden of proving one or more of the following defenses:
- (a) the issuing tribunal lacked personal jurisdiction over the contesting party;
- (b) the order was obtained by fraud;
- (c) the order has been vacated, suspended, or modified by a later order;
- (d) the issuing tribunal has stayed the order pending appeal;
- (e) there is a defense under the law of this state to the remedy sought;
- (f) full or partial payment has been made;
- (g) the statute of limitation under Section 81-8-604 precludes enforcement of some or all of the alleged arrearages; or
- (h) the alleged controlling order is not the controlling order.
(2)
- (a) If a party presents evidence establishing a full or partial defense under Subsection (1), a tribunal may stay enforcement of a registered support order, continue the proceeding to permit production of additional relevant evidence, and issue other appropriate orders.
- (b) An uncontested portion of the registered support order may be enforced by all remedies available under the law of this state.
- (3) If the contesting party does not establish a defense under Subsection (1) to the validity or enforcement of a registered support order, the registering tribunal shall issue an order confirming the order.
Renumbered and Amended by Chapter 426, 2025 General Session