When Ronald Reagan ran for governor of California in 1967, he ran on a very conservative platform with promises like “cleaning up the mess at Berkeley” and “putting welfare bums to work.” But shortly after taking office, he signed one of the first no-fault divorce laws in the United States. Prior to that moment, divorces in California and most other states could only be granted based on adultery, cruelty, abandonment, or some other marital fault. Some people believe that Governor Reagan’s own painful divorce from actress Jane Wyman may have been in the back of his mind when he signed the bill into law.
Within the next 10 or 15 years, most all other states – including Illinois – had followed suit. Earlier this year, lawmakers in the Prairie State took the next step by abolishing evidence-based divorce in this state.
Divorce Procedure
Under the revised Illinois Marriage and Dissolution of Marriage Act, “irreconcilable differences” is the only recognized basis for divorce. Additionally, under Subsection (a-5), if the parties have been separated for at least six months, “there is an irrebuttable presumption that the requirement of irreconcilable differences has been met.” Irreconcilable differences is defined in Section (a), to include:
- Marital Breakdown: The disagreements must be of such a nature that the parties cannot live together anymore. Bear in mind that this element is completely subjective, so as far as this law is concerned, staying out late without calling home can cause a marital breakdown the same as domestic abuse can.
- Expectation of Reconciliation: This element is not as daunting as it may seem. A handful of respondents sometimes try to challenge no-fault divorces on the grounds that there is a reasonable expectation of reconciliation, but these arguments fall flat, because the filing spouse obviously has no intention to reconcile.
If the six months have not expired, judges could technically require specific proof on these two elements, but this outcome almost never occurs because a party’s testimony that irreconcilable differences exist is nearly always sufficient.
Divorce Effect
Although adultery and other faults are no longer a basis for divorce, they can still be a factor in the property settlement. The law in this area has actually not changed much because courts long ago lost any sense of moral outrage over marital fault. For better or worse, a modern marriage is a civil contract that has little if anything to do with anyone’s extra-legal moral standard.
Therefore, marital fault must always be tied to an economic factor. The length of the marriage is one possible link, and this factor is relevant for both property division and alimony purposes. An argument can be made that if adultery or some other conduct ended the marriage prematurely, the judge should take this consideration into account.
Dissipation (waste of community assets) is a much better argument. Assume Husband spent $10,000 in marital funds on gifts for a girlfriend. Since Husband wasted these marital assets, Wife may be entitled to a larger property share upon divorce, in order to compensate her for this financial loss.
Special dissipation rules apply in Illinois. The party must file a formal notice of claim either 30 days after the end of discovery or 60 days before trial. Furthermore, a dissipation claim can only go back three or five years, depending on the facts and circumstances.
Reach Out to Aggressive Attorneys
The new no-fault law may streamline the marriage dissolution process, but it has little effect on property division. For a free consultation with an experienced family law attorney in Schaumburg, contact Glasgow & Olsson. Convenient payment plans are available.
(image courtesy of Jamie Rodriguez)