Legal Opinion

McNeil v. Reynolds

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Decided March 15, 1990No. 88-1602PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SCHWELB, Associate Judge:

Appellant Carl McNeil appeals from a wage withholding order issued to enforce his court-ordered child support obligation. He claims that the statutory procedures for notice of intent to withhold wages required by D.C.Code § 30-509(b) (1988) were not followed and that he was denied credit for direct payments to the children’s mother. The trial court held that the applicable statutory requirements for notification of wage withholding, D.C.Code § 30-509(a), were satisfied, that the proceeding for wage withholding was properly instituted, and that appellant was entitled…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. White v. WhiteCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1977
  2. Foley v. FoleyDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1975

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. State v. PaulingConnecticut Appellate Court · 2007
  2. In re X.B.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1994
  3. In Re XBDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1994

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API