Chicago Child Support Lawyer

Where the respondent’s answer to plaintiff’s petition seeking modification of a divorce decree’s property settlement squarely put in issue the basic allegations of the petition, and contained averments which, if supported by the evidence, strongly suggested the absence of any fraudulent concealment, such pleadings raised issues of fact which had to be tried and the trial court’s order granting relief was relief was reversed and remanded.  Wilson v. Wilson
Construction
___Mandatory Provision
 Subsection (a) of this section is permissive and allows the trial court to exercise its discretion in modifying maintenance or support, while subsection (b) of this section is mandatory and flatly states that the obligation to pay maintenance is terminated by the resident, continuing conjugal cohabitation of the recipient with another person.  In re McGowans
___With Supreme Court Rules
 Rule 296, Supreme Court Rules, does not authorize the court to ignore 750 ILCS 5/505 or this section, but merely provides an additional tool for the court to use in fairly resolving child-support disputes.  In re Fink
Default/Vesting Date
 Each support or maintenance payment is vested on the date it becomes due, this date becoming the default/vesting date, which is important for: (1) calculating the total arrearage, (2) calculating the interest owed, if any (3) an indicator or factor in determining whether the conduct was willful or contumacious, and (4) calculating attorney fees under section 508 of the Illinois Marriage and Dissolution of Marriage Act (750 ILCS 5/508).  In re Hardy
___Burden of Proof
 Where no information other than that elicited by husband’s counsel was presented regarding the daughter’s financial resources and her financial dependency on her mother, and the little information received on cross-examination did not support the mother’s request that the father contributed to the daughter’s education and maintenance, wife failed to meet her burden of supporting request for educational support.  In re McGory

Womens Divorce Lawyers

 When setting an amount for modification of child support, the court may consider the same factors used when formulating an original support order; these factors include the standard of living the child would have enjoyed if the marriage had not been dissolved, and the financial resources of the noncustodial parent.  In re Boyden
 The factors to be considered for modification or termination as to each party are: (1) their ages, social conditions, health, and whether there are any children dependent upon them for support, (2) the duration of the marriage, since the longer the marriage the greater a woman’s claim for support becomes, and (3) their agreement as to the property settlement adopted in the divorce decree.  Gorman v. Gorman

Chicago Child Custody Lawyer

 Trial court abused its discretion when it ruled that it was not required to apply statutory child support guidelines to a petition to modify a father’s child support obligation and that it did not have to make any written findings of fact as to why it was refusing to apply the guidelines.  Anderson v. Heckman
 In accordance with the Illinois Parentage Act of 1984, 750 ILCS 45/1 through 27 (2000), trial courts “shall” use the guidelines and standards set forth in 750 ILCS 5/505 (2000) in determining whether to modify an order for child support in accordance with 750 ILCS 5/510 (2000).  Anderson v. Heckman
 Nothing in 755 ILCS 5/504 or this section authorizes or permits the consideration of the fact that ex-wife was overweight and continued to smoke in the consideration of modification of maintenance; the existence of these “factors” was none of the trial court’s business.  In re Offer
 Deviation from the guidelines may be had upon the consideration of relevant factors, and the factors to be considered in a modification proceeding are the same factors which may be considered when formulating an original support award.  In re Olsen

Divorce Lawyers Dallas