Department of Public Aid ex rel. Schmid v. Williams

State: Illinois

Court: 4th District Appellate

Docket No: 4-01-1009 Rel

Case Date: 02/04/2003

NO. 4-01-1009

IN THE APPELLATE COURT

OF ILLINOIS

FOURTH DISTRICT

THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC AID ex rel.
LISA MARIE SCHMID,
                    Petitioner-Appellee,
                    v.
TERRY E. WILLIAMS,
                    Respondent-Appellant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Appeal from
Circuit Court of
McLean County
No. 95D691

Honorable
Scott A. Drazewski,
Judge Presiding.

JUSTICE APPLETON delivered the opinion of the court:

The Illinois Department of Public Aid (Department)filed a motion on behalf of petitioner, Lisa Marie Schmid, toincrease the amount of child support that respondent, Terry E.Williams, was required to pay, on the ground that his income hadincreased. The trial court granted the motion, and respondentappeals, arguing that the court misconstrued section 505(a)(3)(a)of the Illinois Marriage and Dissolution of Marriage Act(Dissolution Act) (750 ILCS 5/505(a)(3)(a) (West 2000)) and, as aconsequence, miscalculated his net income. We affirm the judgment.

I. BACKGROUND

Petitioner and respondent were married in 1993 and havetwo children: Anthony, born on June 1, 1992, and Jesse, born onMarch 31, 1994. On February 18, 1998, the trial court entered ajudgment dissolving the marriage, ordered respondent to pay childsupport in the amount of $295 twice a month, and allowed him toclaim one of the children as an exemption in his federal incometax returns.

On June 15, 2000, the Department filed the petition formodification. The parties agreed there had been a substantialchange in circumstances to justify increasing the child support. They stipulated that respondent was employed by the IllinoisDepartment of Corrections and his gross income was $1,949 everytwo weeks, minus deductions of $144 under the Federal InsuranceContributions Act (FICA), $58 in state income tax, $68.25 forhealth insurance, and $23 for union dues. After the dissolutionof his marriage with petitioner, respondent filed his federalincome tax return as a single individual (see 26 C.F.R.