Browse cases by category
- Attorneys & Legal Services
- Bankruptcy
- Civil Procedure & Administrative Law
- Civil Rights
- Consumer
- Criminal
- Disability
- Economic Development
- Education
- Elections
- Employment
- Environmental Justice
- Evidence
- Family Law
- Food Programs
- Government and Governmental Services
- Guardianship & Conservatorship
- Health
- Housing
- Immigration
- Juveniles
- License (Auto & Others)
- Mental Health
- Migrants
- Native Americans
- Other
- Prisons
- Public Utilities & Energy
- Rural Issues
- Senior Citizens
- Social Security & SSI
- Taxation
- Torts
- Unemployment Compensation & Unemployment Insurance
- Veterans & Military
- Welfare
- Wills & Estates
- Workforce Development
Arrington v. Fuller
No. 2001-D-923-N (M.D. Ala., filed Jan. 14, 2003) ; Clearinghouse Number: 55029
Description
Parents Win Partial Preliminary Injunction in Challenge to Alabama’s Child Support Distribution
Abstract
Partially granting plaintiffs’ preliminary injunction motion
in a class action challenging Alabama’s failure timely and
accurately to process, distribute, and disburse child support
payments, the district court ordered the state to freeze in trust
state income tax refunds to which named plaintiffs were entitled as
child support; the state was to freeze the funds until it could
properly distribute them in accordance with 42 U.S.C. § 657.
Plaintiffs are custodial parents who rely on child support, family
assistance, or both and noncustodial parents who timely pay child
support that the state processes. Suing the heads of three state
agencies responsible for child support collection and distribution,
plaintiffs also challenge defendants’ failure to give them
adequate notice of amounts collected and distributed and the taking
of an administrative fee from each payment collected. They allege
violations of Title IV-D of the Social Security Act, state child
support enforcement laws, and federal and state regulations and
constitutions. Plaintiffs contend that defendants wrongly
distribute intercepted state income tax refunds because Section 657
requires that past-due support owed to former recipients of family
assistance or Aid to Families with Dependent Children be
distributed first to families to repay arrears and only then to the
government to repay aid. With class certification pending, the
court ruled that plaintiffs had an enforceable right under Section
657 via Section 1983 and thus were likely to prevail on the merits
of a claim. The court ordered defendant human resources
commissioner to affirm that the software for distributing collected
tax rebates in accordance with Section 657 was in place or show why
the court should not certify the class.
