Q: Question about court order
We went to court last week. While in court the father told the judge he will put our daughter on his insurance to help with therapy costs. The Orders states "father offers to add child to insurance to help with out of picket therapy costs". Now he's saying he's not required to and can change his mind
A:
This is not an easy question. Pennsylvania judges all too often shoot from the hip, and they can either contempt a parent or not based on what is written or what is not written in a court order.
Here, the order appears to provide that "dad offers" which is not an order at all. The mere offer is not a binding command to provide. One judge can agree this is not enforceable while another judge can say we must all use common sense and the order does command the father to provide.
For the best answer, the asker should see an attorney with her order.
A:
From the way the Order is written, it does not appear to bind Father into placing the child on his medical insurance. It merely states that Father "offered" to place the child on his insurance, not that the Court mandates him to do so. However, there may be a creative legal argument that there is a binding oral agreement between the parties, based on contract law principles. If Father offered to put the child on his insurance; you accepted; and there was "consideration" supporting the exchange (meaning you were giving something up and Father was getting something in exchange for placing the child on his insurance), you may be able to show the existence of a binding agreement or contract. You would likely need to pull a transcript of the proceedings to prove the existence of a contract. Moreover, enforcement mechanisms under contract law are not the same as enforcement pursuant to a Court Order.
However, beyond this potential argument under contract law principles, it may simply be in Father's interest to place the child on his health insurance, particularly if these are child support proceedings. Under the Pennsylvania Child Support Guidelines (see Rule 1910.16-6), Father may be entitled to a reduction in child support if he is paying the child's health insurance premium. On the flip side, Father may be required to contribute to unreimbursed medical expenses incurred on the child's behalf (such as the costs of therapy). Therefore, it may make economic sense for Father to place the child on his health insurance as opposed to incurring unnecessary unreimbursed costs.
Lastly, though the Court Order itself is vaguely worded and does not necessarily bind Father to place the child on his insurance, I will note that under Pennsylvania law, the obligor (person paying child support) "bears the initial responsibility of providing the child’s health care coverage if it is available at a reasonable cost". Reasonable cost is further defined as "an amount that does not exceed 5% of the obligor’s monthly net income and, when added to the basic child support obligation plus additional expenses the obligor is ordered to pay, does not exceed 50% of the obligor’s monthly net income." So, regardless of what the Order says, it may be that Father is initially responsible for covering the child anyway, depending on the cost of insurance and which party is paying child support.
I would strongly recommend scheduling a consultation with a child support/family law attorney in your area for more guidance on this issue and to get legal advice tailored to your particular situation.
Justia Ask a Lawyer is a forum for consumers to get answers to basic legal questions. Any information sent through Justia Ask a Lawyer is not secure and is done so on a non-confidential basis only.
The use of this website to ask questions or receive answers does not create an attorney–client relationship between you and Justia, or between you and any attorney who receives your information or responds to your questions, nor is it intended to create such a relationship. Additionally, no responses on this forum constitute legal advice, which must be tailored to the specific circumstances of each case. You should not act upon information provided in Justia Ask a Lawyer without seeking professional counsel from an attorney admitted or authorized to practice in your jurisdiction. Justia assumes no responsibility to any person who relies on information contained on or received through this site and disclaims all liability in respect to such information.
Justia cannot guarantee that the information on this website (including any legal information provided by an attorney through this service) is accurate, complete, or up-to-date. While we intend to make every attempt to keep the information on this site current, the owners of and contributors to this site make no claims, promises or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness or adequacy of the information contained in or linked to from this site.