In re Marriage of McGrath
Annotate this CaseThe parties, who had twin children, divorced in 2007, while husband was unemployed. The issue of child support was reserved. The husband lived off assets that had been awarded to him as part of the marital estate, withdrawing about $8,500 from his savings account each month. The wife, who had custody, subsequently petitioned for child support, and, in 2010, was awarded $2,000 a month, even though the husband was still unemployed. For two children, the statutory guideline refers to 28 percent of net income, defined as “the total of all income from all sources,” 750 ILCS 5/505(a)(3). The appellate court affirmed. The supreme court set aside the support order, remanding for specific findings and recalculation. The amount withdrawn from savings should not be considered “income” because the money already belonged to husband. However, if use of the statutory guidelines then generates a support amount that the trial court finds inappropriate, it should make a specific finding to that effect and then adjust the support amount accordingly. One factor it can consider is “the financial resources and needs of the noncustodial parent.”
Court Description:
This child support case comes from Cook County. The parties, who had twin children, divorced in 2007, at a time when the husband was unemployed. The issue of child support was reserved at that time. The husband then began living off assets which had been awarded to him as part of the marital estate, withdrawing about $8,500 from his savings account each month. The wife, who had custody, subsequently petitioned for child support, and, in 2010, was awarded $2,000 a month, even though the husband was still unemployed. The husband appealed and the appellate court affirmed. He appealed again.
In this decision, the supreme court reversed the appellate court and set aside the child support order, remanding the cause to the circuit court for the making of specific findings pursuant to statute and for recalculation of a support amount. The amount withdrawn from savings should not be considered “income” because the money already belonged to him. However, if use of the statutory guidelines (i.e., 28% for two children) generates a support amount which the trial court finds is inappropriate, it should make a specific finding to that effect and then adjust the support amount accordingly. One factor it can consider, as set forth in the statute, is “the financial resources and needs of the noncustodial parent.” The circuit court, on remand, should make the specific finding required by section 505(a)(2) of the Illinois Marriage and Dissolution of Marriage Act.
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.