Welsher v. Rager
North Carolina Court of Appeals
127 N.C. App. 521, 491 S.E.2d 661 (1997)
- Written by Salina Kennedy, JD
Facts
Rosemarie Welsher (plaintiff) and Paul Rager (defendant), New York residents, were divorced in 1980. In 1985, the parties signed an agreement obligating Rager to pay $45 in weekly child support for the parties’ two sons. The New York court issued an order recognizing the child-support agreement. Rager later moved to North Carolina and stopped paying child support in 1995, when the children were 18 and 21 years old. Pursuant to New York law, a parent’s child-support obligation lasts until a child reaches age 21. Pursuant to North Carolina law, the obligation ends when a child reaches age 18. Welsher filed the New York child-support order in North Carolina state court and petitioned the court to enforce the order. Rager objected, arguing that the parties’ original 1980 divorce decree mandated child support only until the children reached age 18 and graduated from high school, that he had not knowingly agreed to pay child support until the children reached age 21, and that he did not believe that it was justifiable to require him to make child-support payments after his children reached age 18. Rager did not provide the court with any documentation concerning the parties’ original divorce decree. The trial court denied Welsher’s petition, and Welsher appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Timmons-Goodson, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
