Child Support Enforcement After Thirty Years

Quote:

---

Quoting Cozume

---

Ok so your reading comprehension has improved, but your legal skills are still lacking. Stop embarrassing yourself.

---

And whose sock-puppet would you be?

To argue laches in an illinois child support matter the respondant must be able to prove the delay caused injury or prejudice. Other than the added statutory 9% interest applicable to the period claimant delayed attempts to collect, what injury or prejudice would you suggest op suffered? I would suspect that would give a valid defense that the interest could not be required to be paid but other than that, since the lack of attempts to collect the delinquent support caused no other injury or prejudice as there was an order in place that allowed for a simple accumulation of arrears to build, I see no other injury or prejudice present


and I would site the case that came from but I'm on my phone and it is a pita to do that

And somewhere, a lonely bridge doth weep.

Quote:

---

Quoting Cozume

---

Hi James - the defense you want to assert is called laches. However, you are going to need to research the case law in Illinois assuming this is the state that has jurisdiction over the CS order. If it is Iowa, then you need to research Iowa law.

---

The only facts that have been shared with us about Iowa is that the parties presently live in Iowa and, should the collection of child support occur through the probate process, it appears that mom's estate would be probated in Iowa. I suppose "anything is possible", but we've been given no facts to suggest that Iowa accepted jurisdiction over the custody or support case.

Quote:

---

Quoting Cozume

---

Moreover, you have the added beneficial facts that she did file to enforce her rights in your state of residence and abandoned the case.

---

To the contrary, her actions clearly evidence that she had no intention of waiving child support, even if she was not sufficiently competent to handle a collection action in pro per.

Quote:

---

Quoting Cozume

---

So from that case, based on the statute of limitations in Illinois they can only collect for any missed payments that are less than 20 years from their due date.

---

Leaving aside for the moment that 735 ILCS 5/13-218 relates to the revival of judgments, and that it's possible to revive a child support judgment such that it is enforceable beyond twenty years, it's important to note that the Illinois legislature has excepted child support judgments from that statute:

Quote:

---

Quoting In re Marriage of Saputo, 363 Ill. App.3d 1011, 845 N.E.2d 901 (2006)

---

[735 ILCS 5/13-218] by its plain terms places a 20-year limitations period on the revival of judgments. The 1997 amendment to section 12-108(a), however, excepts child support judgments from those judgments that require revival. See 735 ILCS 5/12-108(a) (West 2004). Since actual enforcement of child support judgments may occur "at any time" pursuant to the amended section 12-108(a), there is no need for revival of these judgments under section 13-218.

---

See also In re Marriage of Davenport, 904 N.E.2d 650 (2009).

Illinois has no statute of limitations on the collection of child support.

Quote:

---

Quoting Cozume

---

The bottom line is this - in IL if the CS is more than 20 years past due before mama files to enforce the CS order, she is barred by statute from collecting. That is an affirmative defense that OP must raise.
.

---

oh geez. I totally missed that.


there is NO statute of limitations on collection of a child support case in Illinois. They removed that as of July 1 1997. IF it had been over 20 years at that time, the judgment could not be revived. If the 20 year limitation had not run, then it removed the 20 year limitation.

so, it's been how long? Given the girl is 35 now, that means in 1997 she was 18 at the time the law changed. The order was less than 20 years prior to that so as of 1997 the time limitation was removed. ergo; the time to collect on the order is without limit.