Divorce Lawyers New York - Recent Family Law Decisons (20)
RECENT FAMILY LAW DECISIONS (20)
Educational Expenses
Age of Majority
Where marital settlement agreement contained definition for when emancipation occurred, since the agreement did not specifically limit the provision to the husband only, wife was ordered to pay child support until youngest child in husband only, wife was ordered to pay child support until youngest child in husband’s custody reached emancipation under terms of the agreement.
The respondent was not obligated for additional post majority expenses unless by virtue of the marital settlement agreement.
The court could properly require the continuation of support payments for educational purposes after the child attained the age of majority.
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.
College
A provision in a dissolution judgment for the payment of a child’s college expenses is a term in the nature of child support, and the circuit court therefore retains jurisdiction to modify such a provision at any time pursuant to 750 ILCS 5/502 and this section, regardless of whether the provision was ordered by the court under 750 ILCS 5/513 or incorporated into the judgment as a result of a settlement agreement.
Where an institution was not a “college” as that term was contemplated under the marital settlement agreement, the trial court’s award of four months’ additional post-majority child support pursuant to the marital settlement agreement was against the manifest weight of the evidence and was contrary to the express language of the marital settlement agreement.
Although defendant no longer practiced medicine, evidence concerning his financial condition reflected that he retained a substantial income from his investments and did not demonstrate that defendant had experienced a substantial economic reversal which would have provide additional educational support for his child; thus, the manifest weight of the evidence did not reflect that the college expenditures were excessive or otherwise unreasonable.
Defendant’s contention that an obligation for the payment of educational expenses should only be imposed on him after it was studies was without merit.
Consent Decree
The court has power to modify a decree or order as to child support and educational payments and there are no exceptions in regard to prior agreements or “consent decrees;” the trial court is not deprived of the power to modify a consent decree.
Death of Obligor
Where a stipulation and agreed order did not contain any language limiting the obligation to pay a non-minor child’s college education expense to the decedent’s lifetime, the order did not terminate upon the decedent’s death, and his estate was responsible for these expenses.
