Regan v. Regan

Appellate Court of Illinois

Regan v. Regan

187 N.E.2d 286, 38 Ill. App. 2d 383, 1962 Ill. App. LEXIS 434

CourtAppellate Court of Illinois

DecidedNovember 28, 1962

DocketGen. 48,695

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 187 N.E.2d 286 (Regan v. Regan) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Court of Illinois primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Regan v. Regan, 187 N.E.2d 286, 38 Ill. App. 2d 383, 1962 Ill. App. LEXIS 434 (Ill. Ct. App. 1962).

Pincite

Opinion

MR. JUSTICE SCHWARTZ

delivered tbe opinion of the court.

Tbe defendant appeals from an order of tbe trial court entered October 6, 1961, denying bis petition for a reduction in weekly support payments.

Tbe parties were divorced in 1957. At that time defendant was ordered to pay $20 a week for tbe support of bis minor child. On August 1, 1961 plaintiff filed a petition for a rule on defendant to show canse why he should not be held in contempt for failure to comply with the order, and alleged an arrearage of $2840. Defendant pleaded inability to make payments and filed a cross-petition for reduction in the weekly support payments. On September 6, 1961 the court found defendant in arrears in the amount of $1920 and directed him to execute a note for that amount secured by a trust deed covering his interest in some real estate. Defendant executed the trust deed and note and was not in default on that order at the time of the hearing on October 6, 1961.

The hearing on defendant’s petition for a reduction in support payments was then held. After some statements by the court and by counsel for both parties, the court, observing that defendant had hired a court reporter, denied defendant’s petition to reduce on the theory that if he could afford to hire a reporter, he could afford to make the weekly support payments. There was no testimony as to plaintiff’s finances and almost none as to defendant’s financial condition. Defendant was entitled to a full hearing. That includes the right to have witnesses appear and be cross-examined. Saxon v. Saxon, 20 Ill App2d 477, 156 NE2d 229 (Abst Opin). In that case this court said with respect to a similar matter:

“We are fully cognizant of the overwhelming pressure to which a most conscientious judge is subjected in the hearing of motions such as these, and we can well understand the confusion that would follow if the hundreds upon hundreds of such motions in divorce cases were each to receive a formal hearing. Yet, until another legal method for the disposition of these matters is found and provided for by legislation, the courts must provide a hearing when it is requested. This is fundamental.”

The order must he reversed and the cause remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with the views herein expressed.

Order reversed and cause remanded with directions.

DEMPSEY, P. J. and McCORMICK, J., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

MR. JUSTICE SCHWARTZ

delivered tbe opinion of the court.

Tbe defendant appeals from an order of tbe trial court entered October 6, 1961, denying bis petition for a reduction in weekly support payments.

Tbe parties were divorced in 1957. At that time defendant was ordered to pay $20 a week for tbe support of bis minor child. On August 1, 1961 plaintiff filed a petition for a rule on defendant to show canse why he should not be held in contempt for failure to comply with the order, and alleged an arrearage of $2840. Defendant pleaded inability to make payments and filed a cross-petition for reduction in the weekly support payments. On September 6, 1961 the court found defendant in arrears in the amount of $1920 and directed him to execute a note for that amount secured by a trust deed covering his interest in some real estate. Defendant executed the trust deed and note and was not in default on that order at the time of the hearing on October 6, 1961.

The hearing on defendant’s petition for a reduction in support payments was then held. After some statements by the court and by counsel for both parties, the court, observing that defendant had hired a court reporter, denied defendant’s petition to reduce on the theory that if he could afford to hire a reporter, he could afford to make the weekly support payments. There was no testimony as to plaintiff’s finances and almost none as to defendant’s financial condition. Defendant was entitled to a full hearing. That includes the right to have witnesses appear and be cross-examined. Saxon v. Saxon, 20 Ill App2d 477, 156 NE2d 229 (Abst Opin). In that case this court said with respect to a similar matter:

“We are fully cognizant of the overwhelming pressure to which a most conscientious judge is subjected in the hearing of motions such as these, and we can well understand the confusion that would follow if the hundreds upon hundreds of such motions in divorce cases were each to receive a formal hearing. Yet, until another legal method for the disposition of these matters is found and provided for by legislation, the courts must provide a hearing when it is requested. This is fundamental.”

The order must he reversed and the cause remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with the views herein expressed.

Order reversed and cause remanded with directions.

DEMPSEY, P. J. and McCORMICK, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

187 N.E.2d 286, 38 Ill. App. 2d 383, 1962 Ill. App. LEXIS 434, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/regan-v-regan-illappct-1962.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack