Factors Used in Allocation

If the court makes the allocation under IMDMA §513 rather than the parents doing so by agreement, then it is required to take specific relevant factors into account in setting the amount of either support or educational expenses:

(1) The financial resources of both parents.

(2) The standard of living the child would have enjoyed had the marriage not been dissolved.

(3) The financial resources of the child. 750 ILCS 5/513(b).

The application of these factors is not mathematical, automatic, or strictly sequential, and the trial court has discretion to allocate these expenses based on all pertinent factors. See Greiman v. Friedman, 90 Ill.App.3d 941, 414 N.E.2d 77, 46 Ill.Dec. 355 (1st Dist. 1980)(Scholastic abilities of children; cost of private versus public school); In re Support of Pearson, 111 Ill.2d 545, 490 N.E.2d 1274, 96 Ill.Dec. 69 (1986)(cost of public versus private school programs). The court in Larsen v. Larsen, 126 Ill.App.3d 1072, 468 N.E.2d 165, 82 Ill.Dec. 103 (3d Dist. 1984), ruled that it would not require a child who had independent resources to exhaust those resources before it would impose an obligation for educational expenses on the parents, based on their property and income.

The case law clarifies that other non-monetary relationship factors, including the quality of the child’s relationship with the payor (In re Marriage of Sreenan, 81 Ill.App.3d 1025, 402 N.E.2d 348, 37 Ill.Dec. 458 (2d Dist. 1980); In re Marriage of Houston, 150 Ill.App.3d 608, 501 N.E.2d 1015, 103 Ill.Dec. 698 (5th Dist. 1986); Gibb v. Treiezenberg, 188 Ill.App.3d 695, 544 N.E.2d 444, 135 Ill.Dec. 948 (4th Dist. 1989) and the child’s having changed her name from that of her father (In re Marriage of Omelson, 112 Ill.App.3d 725, 445 N.E.2d 951, 68 Ill.Dec. 307 (5th Dist. 1983)), or the child’s living arrangements (In re Marriage of Greenberg, 102 Ill.App.3d 938, 429 N.E.2d 1334, 58 Ill.Dec. 1 (1st Dist. 1981)) are not to be considered by the court in allocating the college expenses.

In Greiman, supra, the appellate court, in determining the father’s obligation toward the continued payment of college expenses for three adult daughters, held theat the trial court erred in not hearing evidence of the father’s obligation to a second family, viewing that as a relevant factor in determining the contribution to be made by the parties college expenses and the payment of attorneys’ fees.

In In re Marriage of Tatham, 173 Ill.App.3d 1072, 527 N.E.2d 1351, 123 Ill.Dec. 576 (5th Dist. 1988), the appellate court held that a husband who was not legally obligated to pay college expenses for children of a prior marriage was not due a credit in computing his net income for purposes of the present marriage since his obligation to pay the college expenses of the children of the prior marriage was only a moral, not a legal, obligation.

Marriage of Sreenan, supra, which affirmed an order for the costs of college education to be divided, with 65 percent for the costs assigned to the father, 23 percent assigned to the mother, and 12 percent assigned to the student, contains a comprehensive discussion of the obligations of a divorced parent for college education. The award in this case should be contrasted with that in In re Marriage of Edelstein, 82 Ill.App.3d 574, 403 N.E.2d 323, 38 Ill.Dec. 235 (1st Dist. 1980) in which the court affirmed an order requiring the non-custodial parent to pay all private educational expenses, $1,000 per month child support, and all of the college education notwithstanding the mother’s employment. Sreenan also contains a discussion covering the issues of college selection and the relationship between the supporting parent and the college student.

Back to Index

See Also: