In re Marriage of Shores
11 N.E.3d 35
Ill. App. Ct.2014Background
- Petitioner Clyde W. Shores appeals an order increasing his 2010 child support based on three items: a 2011 MICP bonus for 2010 work and two relocation reimbursements totaling $34,842.83.
- The trial court included the bonus in 2010 income but later held reimbursements were income or not; it also addressed repayment of reimbursements.
- The dispositive issue is whether the MICP bonus should count as 505(a)(3) income in 2010, given it was received in 2011.
- Emancipation of Emily occurred July 13, 2010, terminating Shores’ ongoing child support obligations for her; prior support periods remain under review for potential adjustment.
- The appellate court ultimately held the 2011 MICP bonus should not be counted as 2010 income, but the relocation reimbursements were properly included as income, and remanded for entry consistent with that ruling.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the MICP bonus is 505(a)(3) income for 2010. | Shores: bonus was earned in 2010, not received until 2011, thus not 2010 income. | Shores: bonus should be treated as 2010 income regardless of receipt. | Bonus not income for 2010; excluded from 2010 calculation. |
| Whether relocation reimbursements are 505(a)(3) income for 2010. | Respondent: reimbursements accrued in 2010 are income even if reimbursed later. | Reimbursements should be excluded if not income in 2010. | Relocation reimbursements accrued in 2010 are income for 505(a)(3) purposes. |
| Does repayment of the relocation reimbursements affect their 505(a)(3) income status? | Repayment negates any economic gain, so reimbursements should not count. | Repayment may affect tax treatment but does not automatically negate income. | Argument forfeited; court assumed reimbursements were income absent repayment; repayment relevance limited. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Marriage of Lindman, 356 Ill. App. 3d 462 (2005) (statutory construction of 505(a)(3) income; de novo review of income concepts)
- In re Marriage of Waller, 339 Ill. App. 3d 743 (2003) (emphasizes issues around emancipation and post-emancipation income)
- In re Marriage of Loomis, 348 Ill. App. 3d 972 (2004) (limitations on post-dissolution income concepts)
- In re Marriage of Wendt, 2013 IL App (1st) 123261 (2013) (bonus speculative until vested; impacts 505(a)(3) income)
- Peters, 326 Ill. App. 3d 364 (2001) (nonvested benefits vs. marital property; relevance to 505(a)(3) timing)
- In re Marriage of Abrell, 236 Ill. 2d 249 (2010) (accrued days as speculative; analogies to income timing)
- In re Marriage of Worrall, 334 Ill. App. 3d 550 (2002) (per diem allowances; income vs. deduction concepts)
- Rogers, 213 Ill. 2d 129 (2004) (broad definition of income for 505(a)(3) purposes; receipt focus)