This case considered whether the court should overrule the long-standing case of In re Marriage of Drews, 115 Ill.2d 201 (1986). The Drews’ case held that a plenary guardian was not able to initiate dissolution of marriage proceedings on behalf of the ward.
The answer is ‘yes. This court believed that a guardian does have the authority to seek permission from the court to file a dissolution petition on behalf of the ward. If such a petition is found to be in the ward’s best interest.
There was a serious car accident. The wife suffered brain damage and became totally disabled. She required full-time care. The husband was appointed plenary guardian of the wife’s person and estate. For the next seven years, the husband provided for the wife’s needs in their home.
Some years later, the husband could no longer care for his wife due to his own Parkinson’s disease. He transferred his plenary guardianship of his wife to Kara.
Husband and wife lived apart for nearly three years. Husband petitioned the circuit court for a divorce. The petition alleged non-cohabitation and irreconcilable differences. Their wife, through Kara, filed a verified counterpetition.
She alleged the same bases as the husband had in his petition. She claimed that it appeared he was concealing assets and income. The wife further claimed that other documents showed that the husband had been romantically involved with another woman for some time. She alleged that he and the woman were living together. In a residence which wife believed husband purchased with marital funds.
Husband dismissed his petition. He moved to dismiss his wife’s counterpetition. Under the Drews’ case, the trial court felt that it had to dismiss the wife’s counterpetition. The wife appealed through her guardian.
The Appellate Court chose not to follow the Drews case. Otherwise, the court felt that they would be allowing the law to unfairly treat incompetent spouses. They would be left at the complete mercy of the competent spouse without consideration of their best interests.
Guardianship is intended to “promote the well-being of the disabled person.
[and] to protect him from neglect, exploitation, or abuse.”
Karbin v. Karbin ex rel Hibler, 2012 IL 112815.
Share This Story, Choose Your Platform!
