Charlie and Sandy were married for eighteen years. From this marriage they had one issue, a girl named Beatrice. Beatrice is now 15 years old. Her parents have decided to end their marriage. In the divorce decree, Charlie was ordered to pay $1,500 per month child support. Beatrice did not take her parents' divorce very well and started to act-out, seeing an older boy, Preston, staying out late,

Question

just doing all of the behavior that kept her mother up at night. The obvious happened. Beatrice told her mother that she was pregnant. She told her parents that her baby's father was madly in love with her and wanted to marry her. The one thing that Charlie and Sandy agreed upon in the last few years was to let Beatrice marry Preston. They gave their consent, and Beatrice got married. Charlie had another thing to cheer about. He no longer had to pay child support. His baby girl was now emancipated.

But before the cork on the champagne bottle popped, Beatrice was no longer pregnant, and Preston brought Beatrice and her suitcase back home. The marriage was annulled. Several months later, Sandy contacted Charlie to ask him where were his child support checks? Sandy needed money for personal, health and beauty items since she returned home. Charlie gleefully said that he did not have to pay child support anymore because Beatrice was emancipated. Is Charlie correct? In your response, define emancipation. Determine if it can be revoked. Also, try to figure out on what ground(s) was Preston able to get he and Beatrice's marriage annulled. Finally, can Charlie's child support order be re-instated?

Answer 1

This question was designed to make the student follow the food trail. First, Beatrice is 15 years old when she supposedly became pregnant. Her parents gave consent for her to marry Preston. They married but the "catalyst" that rushed them into marriage no longer existed. How was Preston able to get this marriage annulled? What about those "items" that Sandy says Beatrice needs. Are they "necessaries"? Finally, when a party is emancipated through marriage, and now the marriage no longer exists, is the party still emancipated thus relieving the obligor of duty to pay child support? The responses should be interesting!