SUSPENSION OF INCOME WITHHOLDING
Applied in 3 court decisions — leading case Zeifman v. Michels (2006)
Most recently applied in Hugo G. Acosta v. Anabel Soto (December 2012)
Added by Acts 1995, 74th Leg., ch. 20, Sec. 1, eff
Court decisions citing this, by year. The dip in the last several years is a data-coverage gap, not a real trend — our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so recent citations are undercounted.
Except in a Title IV-D case, the court may provide, for good cause shown or on agreement of the parties, that the order withholding income need not be issued or delivered to an employer until:
(1) the obligor has been in arrears for an amount due for more than 30 days;
(2) the amount of the arrearages is an amount equal to or greater than the amount due for a one-month period; or
(3) any other violation of the child support order has occurred.
Official source: Texas Constitution and Statutes. Reproduced from public-domain Texas statutes; confirm against the official source for the current text. Not legal advice.