In re Parentage of I.I.
69 N.E.3d 402
Ill. App. Ct.2017Background
- Petitioner (Nanina Carraway) filed parentage and support actions; temporary default support of $100/month was entered in 2013 and later made permanent. Petitioner sought modification in Oct. 2014 alleging respondent (Michael Irvin) had much higher income.
- Respondent belatedly participated, submitted incomplete/contradictory financial disclosures, and missed the second day of the modification hearing (July 9, 2015).
- Petitioner introduced bank records, tax information for TMT Sportz, social-media images, and other documentary evidence showing deposits and business affiliations not disclosed by respondent.
- The trial court found respondent not credible, drew negative inferences from his failures to disclose and his absence, applied 750 ILCS 5/505(a)(5) (needs-based award when income cannot be determined) and set child support at $3,000/month.
- The court also ordered respondent to provide health insurance and initially made support retroactive to Jan. 1, 2011, later amended to Sept. 1, 2013; the appellate court vacated retroactivity to Sept. 1, 2013 and affirmed the rest.
Issues
| Issue | Carraway's Argument | Irvin's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Trial court denial of continuance (July 7 request) | Continuance not warranted; respondent had been dilatory and trial should proceed | Denial prejudiced respondent because he was absent for part of his testimony | Affirmed — no abuse of discretion; respondent showed lack of due diligence and provided no grave reason or affidavit for continuance |
| Motion to reopen proofs after judgment | Reopening would be prejudicial/delaying; petitioner had carried burden | Reopen to allow respondent to present income evidence (he was absent July 9) | Affirmed — denial not an abuse; respondent’s absence was not a reasonable excuse and he offered no specific offer of proof |
| Amount of modified child support ($3,000/mo) | Evidence (petitioner's testimony, bank statements, tax documents, negative inference) supported needs-based award under §505(a)(5) | Insufficient competent evidence of income; bank records were hearsay/no foundation | Affirmed — court permissibly applied §505(a)(5) after finding respondent’s testimony not credible and admitting relevant financial records |
| Retroactive support period | Petitioner argued retroactivity appropriate based on earlier orders and notice | Retroactivity limited to filing date of modification petition (Oct. 9, 2014) | Reversed in part — trial court exceeded statutory authority; retroactivity vacated for period before petition filing (Sept. 1, 2013 to Oct. 9, 2014) |
| Requirement to provide health insurance | Ordering insurance is proper child-support-related obligation under §505.2 | Unnecessary because child already covered; respondent unemployed | Affirmed — within court’s discretion to order obligor to provide/pay health insurance |
Key Cases Cited
- Seymour v. Collins, 2015 IL 118432 (Ill.) (abuse-of-discretion standard for continuance and other trial rulings)
- Foutch v. O’Bryant, 99 Ill. 2d 389 (Ill.) (incomplete record presumption resolved against appellant)
- In re Marriage of Ward, 282 Ill. App. 3d 423 (Ill. App. 1996) (lack of diligence supports denial of continuance)
- In re Marriage of Takata, 304 Ill. App. 3d 85 (Ill. App.) (§505(a)(5) permits needs-based award when income cannot be determined)
- In re Marriage of Severino, 298 Ill. App. 3d 224 (Ill. App.) (court must consider §505 factors when deviating from guidelines)
- Best v. Best, 223 Ill. 2d 342 (Ill.) (appellate deference to trial-court credibility findings)
- In re Marriage of Pettifer, 304 Ill. App. 3d 326 (Ill. App.) (retroactive modification limited to motion filing date)
- Henry v. Henry, 156 Ill. 2d 541 (Ill.) (statutory limitation on court authority to order retroactive support)