Source: https://www.isba.org/ibj/2015/11/newandimprovedillinoismarriageanddi
Timestamp: 2019-04-19 12:41:34+00:00

Document:
Under the recently rewritten Illinois Marriage and Dissolution of Marriage Act (IMDMA) (effective Jan. 1, 2016), there is now only one ground for dissolution - that irreconcilable differences have caused the irretrievable breakdown of the marriage. The previous waiting period of six months (if the parties agree) or two years (if the parties do not agree) has been repealed.
The IMDMA now provides for standardized statewide forms for Interim Attorneys' Fee Award Orders, Financial Affidavits, and Parenting Plans. The standardized forms are being drafted by the applicable Illinois Supreme Court Committee.
Courts will no longer award "custody" or "visitation" under the new IMDMA, so that a parent may be allowed to "visit" with his or her child. Rather, courts will allocate "parental responsibilities" (formerly custody) and "parenting time" (formerly visitation).
The rewrite of the Illinois Marriage and Dissolution of Marriage Act will take effect January 1, 2016 and includes numerous substantial revisions that all practitioners need to know. Here's a summary.
The overhaul of Illinois' marriage, divorce, and parentage laws was long overdue. Public Act 99-0090, the rewrite of the Illinois Marriage and Dissolution of Marriage Act ("IMDMA") and Public Act 99-0085, the rewrite of the Parentage Act, were enacted this summer and both are effective on January 1, 2016. The prior outdated Illinois Marriage and Dissolution of Marriage Act was enacted in 1977 and the Parentage Act was enacted in 1984.
Society and family dynamics have changed dramatically in the past 35 years. Three decades ago, it was still typically the mother's role to care for the children, while the father provided financial support. Pursuant to societal norms, marriage was seen as a contract that should not be broken, and if either spouse or a third party caused a breakup, they could be held responsible in a court of law. Today, in many, if not most families, both parents are employed outside the home, and both share the financial and emotional responsibilities of parenting.
In recognition of the dramatic changes in familial societal norms since 1979, the Illinois General Assembly created the Illinois Family Law Study Committee ("IFLSC") in 2008. (See sidebar for more about the committee.) The IFLSC accepted that marriages do not always work out, and when a divorce takes place, the focus should be on the needs of the children and the parties rather than on placing blame. The overall mission of the IFLSC was to re-write the outdated IMDMA and Illinois Parentage Act, taking into consideration the diverse perspectives and professional experiences of its members.
Not all of the changes to the IMDMA can be discussed in this article, but all should be carefully reviewed by family law practitioners. Among the many improvements, ratifications of current practice, and codification of caselaw that the revised IMDMA includes, what follows is a brief overview of some of the most significant changes that should be noted by all practitioners. Find out more about the new law at ISBA's December 4 CLE (see p. 35).
These "heart balm" actions are abolished to promote the recognition that amicable settlement of domestic relations matters are beneficial to families. Although effective January 1, 2016, litigants may still proceed under any cause of action under the Acts that accrued prior to their repeal.
The idea that we need to continue to litigate "fault" in a broken marriage wastes valuable time and money. Abandoning it promotes better cooperation during resolution of the matter and subsequent to entry of a judgment of dissolution.
The IMDMA now requires the court to enter a judgment of dissolution of marriage within 60 days of the closing of proofs unless the court enters an order specifying good cause, in which case the court shall have an additional 30 days.6 This will provide needed relief to divorce litigants who often wait for lengthy periods for the court's decision without indication when the judgment will be entered.
Coinciding with this change, any petition for contribution to attorneys' fees and costs pursuant to 750 ILCS 5/503(j) must now be filed no later than 14 days after the close of proofs.7 Further, judges will need to also ensure that any oral or written closing arguments are ordered to be completed in a timeframe that allows the court to enter a judgment in the requisite time frame.
The revised IMDMA provides for standardized statewide forms for interim attorneys' fee award orders,13 financial affidavits,14 and parenting plans, which are being drafted by the applicable Illinois Supreme Court Committee.
To encourage accountability and better compliance with judgments, courts will be required to provide specific factual findings for property allocations.17 This will also help appellate courts better understand the trial court's rationale when evaluating an appeal. In addition, it is generally accepted that litigants are more likely to comply with judgments or other orders to the extent they understand the judge's rationale behind them.
In addition, the court may appoint and seek the advice of financial experts or other professionals (similar to a custody evaluations pursuant to current 750 ILCS 5/604(b)).19 The use of a court's witness increases the likelihood of settlement and is likely to minimize the need for retention of multiple experts (and the additional costs as a result of the same). For example, the court may appoint a single expert to conduct a business valuation, which may obviate the need for the parties to obtain two separate business valuations.
Only one change was made at this time affecting the child support section. The definition of "net income" for calculation of child support was revised to allow for the deduction of student loan payments of an obligor.20 In addition, the IFLSC recommended an income sharing model of child support based upon net income, and the Illinois Department of Healthcare and Family Services commissioned a federally mandated economic study, which has been completed.
As a result of that study, the Illinois Child Support Advisory Committee has been working on a major rewrite of Section 505 of the IMDMA which will be the subject of separate legislative action.
The section governing educational expenses for a child who wishes to attend college has been revised to ensure more consistency and fairness. In formulating this recommendation, the IFLSC considered parents' need to also plan and prepare for their own retirement while also meeting any statutory post-high school educational obligations on behalf of their children.
Further, the maximum amount of expenses for tuition, fees, housing, and meals is now capped at what is charged at the University of Illinois at Champaign-Urbana, unless good cause is shown.31 This cap does not include other expenses such as medical expenses and other reasonable living expenses.
Support under this section ends when the student fails to maintain a "C" average (unless in the instance of illness or otherwise extenuating circumstances), becomes 23 years of age or older, receives a bachelor's degree, or marries.32 It does not terminate the court's authority if the child joins the military, becomes pregnant, or is incarcerated.
An application for support of a non-minor child with a disability under this section must be made when the child was eligible for support under 750 ILCS 5/505 (child support) or 750 ILCS 5/513 (post-high school educational expenses).35 The court also now has authority to order that sums awarded be paid to a trust for the benefit of the non-minor child with a disability, which the court did not previously have the authority to order.
Family law will no longer be a winner-take-all litigation process. Courts will no longer award "custody" or "visitation" under the new statute, so that a parent may be allowed to "visit" with his or her child. Rather, courts will allocate "parental responsibilities" (formerly custody) and "parenting time" (formerly visitation).
Parental responsibilities are broken out into categories reflecting different needs a child may have.36 Decisions about education, health, religion, and extra-curricular activities can be divided between both parents or solely assigned to one parent.
Both parents, within 120 days after service or filing of a petition for allocation of parental responsibilities, must file with the court a separate or joint proposed parenting plan.38 This is not a requirement under pre-revision law.
If the court does not approve a joint parenting plan, it must make express findings justifying its refusal to do so.40 Where no agreement is reached between the parties, the court must conduct a hearing or trial to determine a parenting plan that maximizes the child's relationship and access to both parents pursuant to the best interests of the child.41 The addition of the requirements for parties to complete a parenting plan early in the case will help reveal whether there are disputed issues and what they are as soon as feasible.
A parent who has been allocated a majority of parenting time or equal parenting time may seek to "relocate" with a child.42 Again, the "relocation" language has replaced the prior "removal" language.
For example, if a parent lives in Calumet City (located on the Illinois/Indiana border), he or she may move to Hammond, Indiana (approximately 4 miles away) without leave of court or permission from the other parent. Under this same example, the same parent could move up to 25 miles from Calumet City into Indiana (for example, the parent could move to Merrillville, Indiana (21 miles away from Calumet City) but could not move to Valparaiso, Indiana (32 miles away from Calumet City) without leave of court or permission of the other parent.
The relocation provision applies to parents who have been allocated a majority or equal parenting time (parents who do not have a majority or equal parenting time are not required to obtain approval for a move).49 These new provisions will eliminate potential costly litigation under these circumstances where the parties can determine immediately there is an agreement.
The changes set forth in the revised IMDMA and Parentage Act provide much needed updates to these laws that significantly impact families in Illinois. With a growing number of divorces and children born to unmarried couples in society as a whole, these laws impact more and more families every year. In addition, for those attorneys practicing family law, the implementation of the updated laws will be a time of transition, as they must know and understand the changes and adapt not only to the revised laws, but to changes in terminology, standard forms, and procedure in some instances.
P. André Katz was chair of the Illinois Family Law Study Committee and is a principal of Katz & Stefani, LLC, a family law firm with offices in Chicago and Bannockburn.
Erin B. Bodendorfer is an associate at Katz & Stefani, LLC.
The IFLSC was a bipartisan committee composed of experienced family law practitioners, judges, and legislators. It included an equal number of appointees by the Illinois House majority and minority leaders. The Illinois Supreme Court and the Illinois Child Support Advisory Committee also made appointments. In addition, members of every major bar association in Illinois were included in the initial review process, along with judges, family law experts, Illinois state representatives, attorneys, accountants, professors, and others experienced in family law.
The IFLSC spent hundreds of hours examining thousands of pages of written information and evidence. It conducted four public hearings where judges, experts, professors, child psychiatrists, and others with experience in all aspects of family law testified (two in Chicago, one in Springfield, and one in Waukegan).
House Speaker Michael Madigan appointed P. André Katz chair of the group. Other appointees were as follows: (1) Margaret Bennett, Richard Felice, Sidney Mathias, Steven Peskind, David Schaffer (replaced Sen. Chapin Rose), Rep. Jill Tracy, and Hon. Jane Waller (Ret.) (replaced JoAnn Osmond), appointed by Representative Tom Cross; (2) Karen Conti, Jill Egizii, Yehuda Lebovits, Hon. Mark Lopez (replaced Hon. William Boyd), Hon. Benjamin Mackoff (Ret.), Michael McCormick, appointed by Speaker Madigan; (3) Howard Feldman and Hon. Celia Gamrath, appointed by the Illinois Supreme Court; and (4) Ada Skyles (replaced Jerry Stermer) and Richard Zuckerman were appointed by the Child Support Commission.
Jeffrey L. Hirsch, Solving for the X & Y: The Illinois Spousal Maintenance Guidelines, 103 Ill. B.J. 32 (Sept. 2015), http://www.isba.org/ibj/2015/09/solvingxyillinoisspousalmaintenance.
David H. Hopkins, New Spousal Support Guidelines for Divorcing Couples in Illinois, Family Law (Oct. 2014), http://www.isba.org/sections/familylaw/newsletter/2014/10/newspousalsupportguidelinesdivorcin.
Brian A. Schroeder, The New Illinois Spousal Maintenance Law: Retroactive or Prospective?, 103 Ill. B.J. 32 (Jan. 2015), http://www.isba.org/ibj/2015/01/newillinoisspousalmaintenancelawret.
740 ILCS 5/.01; id. at §§ 5/7.1, 15/.01, 15/10.1, 50/.01, 50/7.1.
735 ILCS 5/2-615; id. at § 5/2-619; In re Marriage of Wolff, 355 Ill. App. 3d 403 (2d Dist. 2005).
Id. at §§ 5/503(f), (k).
Id. at § 5/504(b-2); id. at § 5/510(c-5).
Id. at § 5/504; id. at § 5/510(a-6).
In re Marriage of Crook, 211 Ill. 2d 437 (2004); In re Marriage of Mueller, 2015 IL 117876.
In re Marriage of Wojcik, 362 Ill. App. 3d 144 (2d Dist. 2005); 750 ILCS 5/504 (a)(10).
Id. at §§ 5/609.2(c), (d).
Id. at § 5/600(g); id. at § 5/609.2.
Id.; id. at § 36/202(c).
Bravo on this article. Job well done!

References: § 5
 § 5
 § 5
 § 5
 § 5
 § 5
 § 5
 § 36