In re Marriage of Tiballi, 2014 IL 116319

1. Case citation and parties
- In re Marriage of Tiballi, 2014 IL 116319 (Ill. Mar. 20, 2014).
- Robert N. Tiballi (appellant) v. Sheila J. Ilagan Tiballi (appellee).

2. Key legal issues
- Whether fees charged by a court‑appointed custody evaluator under 750 ILCS 5/604(b) are recoverable as “costs” under the voluntary‑dismissal provision of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/2‑1009(a)).
- Proper statutory framework for allocating section 604(b) evaluator fees when a custody petition is dismissed.

3. Holding / outcome
- Supreme Court reversed the appellate court and remanded. Fees of a section 604(b) professional evaluator are not “court costs” taxable under section 2‑1009(a); instead, allocation/payment must be determined pursuant to the criteria set forth in section 604(b) of the Illinois Marriage and Dissolution of Marriage Act.

4. Significant legal reasoning (concise)
- The Court analyzed the nature of the dismissal and statutory schemes. It noted the dismissal in this case was entered on the defendant’s motion, not a voluntary dismissal initiated by the plaintiff under section 2‑1009(a). More important, the Court construed the Marriage Act: section 604(b) expressly governs appointment of experts and contemplates that the court allocate their fees based on factors relevant to custody disputes (best interests of the child, parties’ financial resources and conduct, etc.).
- The Court rejected treating evaluator fees as ordinary “court costs” under section 2‑1009(a) (which addresses a plaintiff’s right to dismiss prior to trial “upon payment of costs”), explaining that professional evaluators appointed under section 604(b) exist within a distinct statutory scheme that prescribes how their fees should be handled. The circuit court’s characterization of the evaluator fee as a section 2‑1009(a) cost (and taxing it to the non‑moving party) was improper. The case was remanded for allocation under section 604(b).

5. Practice implications for family law attorneys
- Do not assume section 604(b) evaluator fees can be recovered as routine “costs” under section 2‑1009(a). When an evaluator is appointed, litigators should: (a) seek explicit written orders addressing interim payments and reservation of ultimate allocation; (b) prepare evidence and argument on the section 604(b) allocation factors (child’s best interests, parties’ finances, conduct, reason for appointment); and (c) avoid relying on a technical “voluntary dismissal” argument to tax evaluator fees. Courts must allocate evaluator fees under the Marriage Act’s criteria, so counsel should proactively document ability to pay and any conduct warranting allocation adjustments.