Significant Changes in the Law with Regard to Child Support in 2003

By Alan L. Fishbein, Esquire

Significant changes occurred in 2003 with regard to payors and payees of child support. In the last session of the legislature they amended the date by which child support terminates from eighteen to the first to occur of the following events:

1. The child dies.
2. The child marries.
3. The child is emancipated.
4. The child graduates from or is no longer
     enrolled in secondary school or
5. The child attains the age of nineteen years.

This change in the law will undoubtedly affect many separation agreements and divorce judgments which already provide that the age to terminate child support is eighteen. A recent trial court decision in the Circuit Court for Howard County held that even though a child had already attained the age of eighteen prior to the effective date of the statute on October 1, 2003, the obligation to pay child support continued until the child completed high school. This retroactive application of the statute will probably come as a shock to many parents who believe that their child support obligations will cease upon their children attaining eighteen years of age.

In addition, a second issue of significance with regard to the payment of child support arose from a decision reached by the Maryland Court of Appeals on September 8, 2003 in Lawrence Melvin Klass vs. Kathy Ann Hartman Klass, No. 125, Sept Term, 2002. In the Klass case the father was the payor parent and he filed bankruptcy. Generally when a party files bankruptcy the automatic stay goes into effect under bankruptcy law which precludes any further action in the state court absent an order from the bankruptcy court lifting the automatic stay and allowing the matter to proceed in state court. This process is both expensive and time consuming. In Klass the Maryland Court of Appeals held that the filing of a bankruptcy did not preclude the Circuit Court from establishing child support and alimony and making a determination of arrearages without first obtaining a lift stay from the bankruptcy court. In addition, the Court of Appeals in Klass held that a judgment entered against the husband for attorney's fees payable to the former wife's attorney was also outside of the provisions of the automatic stay and thus the attorney's fees could be collected without first requesting relief from the bankruptcy court. This case marks a significant departure from the prior law which required proceedings in the bankruptcy court before a person could go to the state court to seek arrearages in child support and alimony and for payment of attorney's fees incurred as a result of the arrearages. Thus, no longer will parties be able to file bankruptcy in an effort to delay the collection of child support, alimony and attorney's fees relating to same. This will undoubtedly result in quicker determinations of these issues at the state court level.