In re Marriage of Tworek, 2017 IL App (3d) 160188

1) Case citation and parties
- In re Marriage of Tworek, 2017 IL App (3d) 160188 (3rd Dist. Oct. 11, 2017).
- Petitioner-Appellee: Amy L. Tworek (mother). Respondent-Appellant: David J. Tworek (father).

2) Key legal issues
- Whether a trial court erred in refusing to modify an agreed five‑day visitation notice provision.
- Whether the court abused its discretion by ordering the father to contribute to the mother’s attorney fees.
- Whether the court erred in denying the father’s request to deviate downward from guideline child support.

3) Holding / outcome
- Appellate court affirmed. Trial court’s denial of the father’s motion to shorten the five‑day notice (but clarification of “emergency”) was affirmed; award of $24,000 contribution toward mother’s attorney fees was affirmed; denial of downward deviation in child support was affirmed.

4) Significant legal reasoning (concise)
- Visitation notice: Although agreed orders are interpreted as contracts generally, agreements affecting custody/visitation are subject to the child’s best interests (750 ILCS 5/607, 602(a)). The court may modify an agreed visitation term if modification serves the child’s best interests. The trial court considered the guardian ad litem’s input, the parties’ conduct (finding father controlling/manipulative and less credible), and the children’s interests; it reasonably declined to shorten notice but defined “emergency.” Appellate review was for abuse of discretion/manifest weight.
- Attorney fees: Trial courts may order fee contribution under 750 ILCS 5/508 and must consider factors in §503/§504 (see §503(j)(2)). The proper financial snapshot is the parties’ circumstances at the time of the fee hearing. The mother provided a May 29 disclosure and live testimony about current finances at the Aug. hearing; the court found father had ability to pay and that litigation costs were increased by his conduct. The father failed to object to the disclosure and did not challenge reasonableness of fees on appeal—issues waived.
- Child support: The guideline for two children is 28% of net income (750 ILCS 5/505). Father failed to produce evidence sufficient to justify a downward deviation; trial court’s discretionary denial was not an abuse.

5) Practice implications
- When seeking modification of an agreed parenting term, frame arguments around best‑interest factors and present evidence of changed circumstances; don’t rely on contract principles alone.
- For fee petitions, file timely, contemporaneous financial disclosures and elicit live testimony about current finances at the hearing; object timely to preserve appellate issues.
- For child‑support deviation requests, submit detailed financial proof (calculations, documentation of extraordinary circumstances) and preserve challenges on reasonableness/credibility for appeal.
- Consider including clear definitions (e.g., “emergency”) and notice mechanics in parenting plans to avoid future disputes.