Remarriage

Remarriage
   Where the petitioner agreed to a modified judgment after the respondent had remarried, implicit in the agreement was a waiver of the remarriage provision.  In re Adamson
   Remarriage of the parties does render the prior divorce decree unenforceable.  In re Parks
   The first Illinois case to discuss the effect of a remarriage upon a prior divorce decree is In re Marriage of Leon, where the court held that the trial court in a first divorce action is divested or further jurisdiction with regard to the division of property upon the subsequent remarriage and redivorce of the parties.  In re Parks
   The term “remarriage” as it appears in this section means the ceremony of marriage and not the status or marriage, and the declaration of the invalidity of petitioner’s remarriage did not act to reinstate the maintenance obligation.  In re Harris
   Marriage settlement agreements may extend maintenance payments beyond the recipient’s remarriage.  Broadway bank v. Kakos
   Remarriage of the recipient spouse does not automatically reduce an unallocated award of maintenance and child support; rather, as is required in other cases where a modification is sought, the party desiring the reduction must petition the court to modify its prior decree.  In re Erickson
   Where ex-husband ceased his alimony payments on the remarriage of his ex-wife but voluntarily resumed his alimony payments upon the judicial declaration of invalidity of his ex-wife’s remarriage, the actions of the parties evidenced an intent that the term remarriage, as used in the parties’ decree of divorce, referred to a status of marriage rather than a ceremony of marriage.  Thomas v. Thomas
   The trial court properly denied former husband retroactive recovery of a portion of the monthly payments made to former spouse during the period she resided with her present husband before her marriage, where the payments were characterized as child support.  In re Kessler
   The provisions of a consent decree that the husband pay each year for two plastic eyes required by the wife violated the public policy against payment of alimony and maintenance after remarriage and was therefore a nullity. Balasa v. Balasa

Res Judicata
   The trial court was not barred by res judicata from considering facts that were new since the last hearing in relation to the propriety of the maintenance award.  In re Connors
   Res judicata and collateral estoppel did not bar husband’s action for arrearage in wife’s contributions to children’s educational expenses.  Wife’s action seeking an increase in child support had no effect on husband’s action seeking reimbursement from wife for her alleged failure to contribute to children’s college expenses.  In re Potts
   While the decree is conclusive and res judicata as to all fats and circumstances existing prior to its entry, the court has the continuing power, for causes accruing subsequent to its entry, to modify the provisions of the decree to meet the changed conditions of the parties.  Scalfaro v. Scalfaro

Retirement
   Whether a spouse may rely on his retirement as a change in circumstances to justify the modification of maintenance depends upon the circumstances of each individual case; relevant factors include his age, health, motives and timing of retirement, ability to provide for her.  In re Walter

Revestment
   The court had authority to modify the distribution of proceeds under the doctrine of revestment; under this doctrine, litigants may revest a court which has general jurisdiction over the matter, with both personal and subject matter jurisdiction, over the particular cause after the 30 day period following final judgment during which post-judgment motions must ordinarily be filed.  In re Demond
   In order for the revestment rule to apply, the parties must actively participate without objection in proceedings which are inconsistent with the merits of the prior judgment.  In re Demond

Back to 750 ILCS 5/510 Home Page