Section 511 Procedure

   Sec. 511. Procedure.  A judgment of dissolution or of legal separation or declaration of invalidity of marriage may be enforced or modified by order of court pursuant to petition.
   (a) Any judgment entered within this Sate may be enforced or modified in the judicial circuit wherein such judgment was entered or last modified by the filing of a petition with notice mailed to the respondent at his last known address, or by the issuance of summons to the respondent.  If neither party continues to reside in the county wherein such judgment was entered or last modified, the court on the motion of either party or on its own motion may transfer a post-judgment proceeding, including a proceeding under the Income Withholding for Support Act [750 ILCS 28/1 et seq.] to another county or judicial circuit, as appropriate, where wither party resides.  If the post-judgment proceeding is with respect to maintenance or support, any such transfer shall be to the county or judicial circuit wherein the recipient or proposed recipient of such maintenance or support resides.
   (b) In any post-judgment proceeding to enforce or modify in one judicial circuit the judgment of another judicial circuit of this State, the moving party shall commence the proceeding by filing a petition establishing the judgment and attaching a copy of the judgment as a part of the petition.  The parties shall continue to be designated as in the original proceeding.  Notice of the filing of the petition shall be mailed to the clerk of the court wherein the judgment was entered and last modified in the same manner as notice is mailed when registering a foreign judgment.  Summons shall be served as provided by law.
   (c) In any post-judgment proceeding to enforce or modify the judgment of another state, the moving party shall commence the proceeding by filing a petition to enroll that judgment, attaching a copy thereof as a part of the petition and proceed as provided for in paragraph (b) hereof.
   (d) In any post-judgment proceeding to enforce a judgment or order for payment of maintenance or support, including a proceeding under the Income Withholding for Support Act [750 ILCS 28/1 et seq.],  where the terms of such judgment or order provide that payments of such maintenance or support are to be made to the clerk of the court and where neither party continues to reside in the county wherein such judgment or order was entered or last modified, the court on the motion of either party or on its own motion may transfer the collection of the maintenance or support to the clerk of the court in another county or judicial circuit, as appropriate, wherein the recipient of the maintenance or support payments resides.

Appeal

___Prior Petition Not Filed
   Where the appellant was not requesting a modification of the divorce decree but, rather, a termination of support payments in accord with his interpretation of the divorce decree, his appeal was not barred by a failure to file a petition to modify the decree under former Ill.Rev.Stat., ch.40,para. 19 (see now this section).  Waldron v. Waldron

Enforcement

___Foreign Decree
   A court can enforce the existing terms of a foreign court decree without re-opening the judgment.  Osborn ex rel. Osborne v. Sprowls

___Forum
   Child of wife who failed to establish a trust for his benefit as ordered in the divorce decree lacked standing to seek enforcement of the provisions of the judgment for divorce to which he was not a party.  In re Garrison
   A child may not bring suit against his father to recover arrearages in child support payments.  Kelleher v. Kelleher
   Since a child is furnished support by other persons, an equitable result would not be obtained if the child had a right to sure his father for past-due support.  Kelleher v. Kelleher

Filing of Petition
   A party is not required to file a petition to “enroll” the judgment and another separate petition to “modify” the judgment.  In re Bussey

___Failure to File
   Where father failed to file appropriate petition his obligations for college expenses continued to accrue and became rights vested in mother, and she was entitled to a judgment for the sum shown to be due.  In re Sawyer

Foreign Judgment

___Failure to Follow Procedure
   Police officers were not entitled to absolute immunity in a civil rights action by a mother following the officers’ seizure of her daughter where they were acting pursuant to an unenforceable out-of-state order which had not been filed with a state court as required by 735 ILCS 5/12-652 750 ILCS 5/511(c). Dunn v City of Elgin

___Modification
   Although an Illinois court cannot act contrary to a foreign judgment as regards disposition of property, unless the trial court finds the existence of conditions that justify the re-opening of the judgment; a court can enforce the existing terms of a foreign court decree without re-opening the judgment.  Osborne ex rel. Osborne v. Sprowls

___Registration in Illinois
   Orders registering out-of-state dissolution judgments under subsection (c)are not in and of themselves causes of action and do not adjudicate the rights of parties; rather, they are merely procedural devices by which a party may seek enforcement or modification in Illinois of judgment entered in another state, and are not necessary to confer jurisdiction on the court.  In re Buchanio

Hearing
   Defendant was entitled to a full hearing on his petition for a reduction in support payments, including the right to have witnesses appear and be cross-examined.  Regan v. Regan

Jurisdiction
   Without a petition to modify child support on file, the circuit court’s subject matter jurisdiction was not invoked, and the orders entered with regard to petitioner’s rights to child support were void.  Ottwell v. Ottwell
   In order for a circuit court to have jurisdiction of the subject matter and of the parties, it is necessary that a petition for modification of a divorce decree regarding child support be filed to invoke subject matter jurisdiction, and that notice be mailed to the respondent of the petition.  Ottwell v. Ottwell
   The circuit court had subject matter jurisdiction to modify an out-of-state divorce decree because the change-in-custody petition filed by the petitioner was sufficient to enroll the decree in Illinois.  In re Bussey
   Strict compliance with the statutory requirements of subsection (c)of this section was not necessary for the court to have subject matter jurisdiction over a proceeding to modify custody and child support because a trial court’s jurisdiction arises from the constitution rather than from the statutes; the inquiry must be whether there exists a justiciable controversy, and if so, are there any statutory conditions precedent to judicial intervention.  In re Bassey

The trial court acquired subject matter jurisdiction over petition to modify custody and child support upon the filing of the original petition accompanied by a copy of the foreign order.  In re Bussey
   Illinois circuit courts have jurisdiction in all justiciable matters and may exercise jurisdiction in cases involving enforcement or modification of out-of-state divorce decrees when they are registered as statutorily provided.  Coons v. Wilder
   When dealing with such matters as grounds for divorce, payment of alimony and modification of divorce decrees, which are regulated by a statute, a court is exercising powers granted by the legislature and cannot by incorporating a contractual provision in its decree divest itself of the power to modify, contrary to the legislative will.  Duvall v. Duvall
   In determining the propriety or impropriety of divorce decree ordering conveyance of property under the former Divorce Act, the authority of the court was based upon powers conferred by statute rather than upon general equity powers.  Debrey v. Debrey

Maintenance

___Modification Not Necessary
   The provision for the payment of alimony by husband as one-half of his salary earned and received as a teacher or employee of the public schools of the City of Chicago, Illinois, as long as he is so employed was held reasonably definite and certain while the husband was employed was held reasonably definite and certain while the husband was employed as a school teacher.  Condy v. Condy

___Modification Proper
   The court’s order directing respondent to provide for reinstatement of the contingent survivorship benefit or, in the alternative, to adequately fund an equivalent benefit, was proper since respondent’s action in destroying this benefit was interference with a provision of the separate maintenance settlement agreement which, like the respondent’s right to his pension benefits, was adopted by the dissolution judgment.  In re Lipkin

___Timely Appeal
   A proceeding resulting in a final judgment order which dismissed the plaintiff’s petition for alimony and maintenance with prejudice and in bar of action was a “trial” or adjudication upon the merits; where the plaintiff filed a motion for rehearing and to vacate the final judgment order within 30 days of the order, and a notice of appeal was given within 30 days of the order denying the motion to vacate, the appeal was timely filed.  Fulwider v. Fulwider

Notice

___ By Mail
   Service by mail of a petition was proper despite respondent’s objections thereto where the court already had personal jurisdiction over him and such service was all that was required for modification by post-judgment proceedings.  Wait v. Wait

___Insufficient
   Order which purportedly modified former husband’s support obligation was in error, if not void, where only notice given was to respondent’s then attorney of record; since only appearance made by respondent was special and limited, the impropriety of the notice was not waived.  In re Mullins

Nunc Pro Tunc Order
   Where the court entered its order nunc pro tunc modifying the decree and reducing the alimony to be paid, the route by which the trial court reached its destination was out of line with all recognized procedure under former Ill.Rev.Stat.,ch.40, para. 19 (see now this section).  Briggs v. Briggs

Pleadings

___Verification
   Since the appellant has the burden of presenting the record on appeal to support his theory of the case, his failure to include any prior verified pleadings required the court to reject his contention that the wife’s post-decree petition should have been verified.  In re Sreenan

Support

___Modification
   Although it is the rule that modification of child support provisions generally rests in the sound discretion of the trial court, such an order may be reversed when manifest injustice has been done.  Glass v. Peitchel
   The court has the power to modify a decree or order as to child support and educational payments, with no exceptions for prior agreements or “consent decrees.”  Duval v. Duval

___Voluntary Unemployment
   A parent should not be permitted to avoid responsibility for support payments by the bad faith refusal to earn income or in the case of a voluntary loss of employment.  Glass v. Peitchel

Back to Divorce Articles