In re Marriage of Kuper, 2019 IL App (3d) 180094

1) Case citation and parties
- In re Marriage of Kuper, 2019 IL App (3d) 180094 (3d Dist. Apr. 17, 2019).
- Petitioner-Appellee: Rita Kuper; Respondent-Appellant: LaVern Kuper.

2) Key legal issues
- Whether the trial court erred by (a) increasing and making permanent maintenance on post‑judgment review, (b) treating the husband’s investment withdrawals/inherited assets as income or a basis for increasing maintenance, and (c) applying the amended statutory maintenance guidelines to a post‑judgment review.

3) Holding/outcome
- The appellate court affirmed the maintenance increase in substance, but held the trial court erred in applying the amended guidelines. The judgment was affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded. (There was a dissent.)

4) Significant legal reasoning (concise)
- Standard of review: modification of maintenance reviewed for abuse of discretion. The panel reviewed the trial court’s careful application of the statutory factors in sections 504(a) and 510(a‑5) of the Illinois Marriage and Dissolution of Marriage Act.
- The trial court found Rita had ongoing need (her net monthly resources without maintenance left only a small surplus, limiting ability to absorb emergencies) and that LaVern had ability to pay (large inherited assets, pension, continued spending to support a second household). The court also considered LaVern’s voluntary retirement, lack of alternative employment, and his choice to support his new wife and her children.
- Although the trial court used the new statutory guidelines in calculating maintenance, the appellate court held that using the amended guidelines on a postjudgment review was improper. Nevertheless, the appellate court concluded the amount awarded was supported by the statutory factors and therefore the substantive award was appropriate. The matter was remanded to correct the legal basis/record consistent with that conclusion.

5) Practice implications for family law attorneys
- Make the record: when seeking or defending modification, obtain detailed findings under both 504(a) and 510(a‑5) (income, assets, efforts to become self‑supporting, retirement voluntariness, contributions to other households). Courts will scrutinize voluntary retirement and discretionary support of others.
- Asset withdrawals/inheritances: courts may consider inherited assets and withdrawals when assessing ability to pay, but converting assets into income requires clear findings; preserve objections and seek clarifying findings.
- Watch statutory timing: don’t assume newly enacted maintenance guidelines apply retroactively to preexisting judgments; challenge or preserve issues about which statutory version governs a postjudgment review.
- If a court misapplies the legal framework but the record independently supports the result under the correct factors, appellate courts may affirm the award while reversing the legal basis —so obtain alternative legal theories and robust factual findings.