§28.12 Interstate Collection

• Jurisdiction: Washington

§ 28.12 INTERSTATE COLLECTION

Interstate collection of support poses a serious problem for the residential parent. Several options are available: (1) state-assisted collection; (2) private enforcement under Washington's Uniform Interstate Family Support Act, Chapter 26.21A RCW; or (3) private enforcement under Washington's Uniform Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Act, Chapter 6.36 RCW. Interstate collection of support is predicated on the legal doctrine that one state must give full faith and credit to the judgments of another state.

[1] Full Faith and Credit

The full faith and credit clause of the U.S. Constitution requires that an out-of-state decree be enforced in courts of this state to the extent that it is final and unmodifiable. Barber v. Barber, 323 U.S. 77, 65 S. Ct. 137, 89 L. Ed. 82 (1944); Sistare v. Sistare, 218 U.S. 1, 30 S. Ct. 682, 54 L. Ed. 905 (1910). The problems involved in the interstate enforcement of support led to the enactment of the Full Faith and Credit for Child Support Orders Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1738B.

The Act requires courts to enforce out-of-state support orders that were issued in accordance with the Act (i.e., when the court had personal and subject matter jurisdiction and reasonable notice and an opportunity to be heard was given to the contestants). 28 U.S.C. § 1738B(c). This Act limits the authority of a state court to modify an out-of-state order if the Act's requirements were met and one contestant resides in the state. 28 U.S.C. § 1738B(d), (e). The Act's definition of "state" includes Indian country. 28 U.S.C. § 1738B(b).

[2] State-Assisted Collection

State child support agencies are required to assist each other in the interstate collection of child support. In re Marriage of Titterness, 77 Wn. App. 182, 890 P.2d 32 (1995). A fundamental shift has occurred in interstate support enforcement with the adoption of the Uniform Interstate Family Support Act (amended 2008), by every state. The key difference between UIFSA and the former Uniform Reciprocal Enforcement of Support Act (URESA), is that under URESA, multiple support orders could be in effect at the same time, with some of those orders modifying the original and others not. Now, UIFSA allows only one support order to be in effect and limits the situations in which a support order may be modified in a different state. When DCS takes enforcement action and multiple orders have been entered, DCS will determine the controlling order pursuant to RCW 26.21A.130.

UIFSA...