Kohl v. Amundson
Annotate this CaseDale Kohl
Plaintiff and Appellee
v.
Barbara Amundson
Defendant and Appellant
[2001 SD 4]
South Dakota Supreme Court
Appeal from the Circuit Court of
The Second Judicial Circuit
Minnehaha County, South Dakota
Hon. Glen A. Severson, Judge
Cynthia J. Ahrendt
Sioux Falls, South Dakota
Attorneys for plaintiff and appellee
Monica L. Lawrence
East River Legal Services
Sioux Falls, South Dakota
Attorneys for defendant and appellant
Considered on Briefs November 27, 2000
Opinion Filed 1/3/2001
SABERS, Justice
[¶1.] Child support payments of $4,362.60 were deducted from Dale Kohl’s wages. DNA and blood tests confirmed that Kohl was not the father of Barbara Amundson’s child. The trial court awarded Kohl $4,432.60 from Amundson for recovery of the support payments. Amundson appeals. We affirm.
FACTS[¶2.] The facts are uncontested. Amundson visited the Office of Child Support Enforcement (OCSE) to obtain child support for J.A., her minor child. She submitted the names of two men to the OCSE as possible fathers of J.A. The OCSE commenced a support action against Kohl.
[¶3.] For reasons unclear in the record, Kohl failed to respond to the Summons and Complaint for paternity. A default judgment was entered against him on November 5, 1997. As a result of the default judgment, Kohl was ordered to pay $368.00 per month for support of the minor child. A total of $4,362.60 in support payments was eventually taken from Kohl’s wages.
[¶4.] On July 14, 1998, Kohl made a motion for determination of paternity. As a result, DNA blood tests were taken which established that he was not the father of J.A. The judgment of paternity was vacated November 12, 1998.
[¶5.] Kohl initiated this action to recover the monies that were withheld from his wages for the support of the child. As indicated, the money judgment against Amundson was for the amount of money paid by Kohl under the child support judgment.[1] Amundson appeals.
STANDARD OF REVIEW[1]. Amundson stresses that there are no findings that the support payments were used for anything other than the support of the minor child.
[2]. The record indicates that the biological father has not been determined.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.