## Facts

- An Indiana resident alleged that Robert Herbert Kramer, a Minnesota resident and interstate truck driver, was the father of her child.
- Indiana initiated a paternity and child-support action in 1982; Kramer did not appear, and the state court record did not show service of process on him.
- In December 1982, the Indiana court entered a default judgment establishing paternity and ordering Kramer to pay $25 per week in child support.
- Kramer claimed he first learned of the order years later when his employer began withholding wages based on the Indiana order; he retained counsel to contest the judgment but did not appear for scheduled hearings, and counsel withdrew.
- In 1998, the federal government indicted Kramer under the Child Support Recovery Act (CSRA), 18 U.S.C. § 228, alleging willful failure to pay a past-due support obligation for a child residing in another state.
- At his federal trial, Kramer did not dispute nonpayment but argued the Indiana order was void because the Indiana court lacked personal jurisdiction absent service; the district court denied his motion for acquittal and convicted him, imposing probation and restitution.

## Issues

1. In a prosecution under 18 U.S.C. § 228, may the defendant collaterally attack the predicate state child-support order on the ground that the issuing court lacked personal jurisdiction?
2. Does a child-support order entered by default without service of process constitute a “past due support obligation” under § 228?

## Decision

- The Seventh Circuit reversed the conviction and remanded.
- The court held that a CSRA defendant may collaterally challenge the predicate state order on jurisdictional grounds.
- Because the state record did not show service and the parties did not contend Kramer was served, the Indiana court lacked personal jurisdiction when it entered the default order, rendering it void.
- A void order cannot supply the valid “past due support obligation” required as an element of a § 228 offense; therefore, the government failed to prove an essential element.

## Legal Principles

- A judgment entered without personal jurisdiction—ordinarily obtained through proper service of process or voluntary appearance—is void.
- Full faith and credit does not require recognition or enforcement of a void judgment.
- In CSRA prosecutions, collateral attacks on the merits of the underlying state support determination are generally not permitted, but collateral attacks asserting a jurisdictional defect in the predicate order are permitted.
- The CSRA’s “past due support obligation” element presupposes an obligation validly determined under a court (or qualifying administrative) order; an order void for lack of jurisdiction cannot satisfy that element.

## Conclusion

The Seventh Circuit set aside Kramer’s CSRA conviction because the predicate Indiana default support order was entered without personal jurisdiction due to lack of service, making it void and insufficient to establish the statute’s required “past due support obligation.”


United States v. Kramer, 225 F.3d 847 (7th Cir. 2000)