¶ 26 Generally, we review the court's ruling on a petition for attorney fees under the Act for an abuse of discretion. In re Marriage of Harrison, 388 Ill.App.3d 115, 120 (2009). "However, determining whether the circuit court applied the correct standard when it awarded the fees requires interpretation of section 508 of the Act, which is a legal question that [we] review[ ] de novo."

See Material Service Corp. v. Department of Revenue, 98 Ill. 2d 382, 386 (1983) (a party cannot complain of error which does not prejudicially affect it). ¶ 55 The second thing that the court did in the JDOM was presumably grant that part of Marie's pending petition for contribution brought pursuant to section 508(b) of the Act (750 ILCS 5/508(b) (West 2018)). Under section 508(b), if the court finds that a party needlessly increases the cost of litigation, it shall "allocate all fees and costs" of all parties to the party or counsel found to have acted improperly. 750 ILCS 5/508(b) (West 2018); In re Marriage of Harrison, 388 Ill. App. 3d 115, 120 (2009). Section 508(b) is mandatory, not discretionary.

Id. A trial court's decision to award or deny attorney fees under the Act will not be disturbed absent an abuse of discretion. In re Marriage of Harrison, 388 Ill. App. 3d 115, 120 (2009).¶ 54 Canulli argues that the trial court failed to conduct an evidentiary hearing despite its order that it was reserving any issue of attorney fees until after the court enters its dissolution of marriage judgment.

We will not disturb a trial court's decision to award or deny attorney absent an abuse of discretion. In re Marriage of Harrison, 388 Ill. App. 3d 115, 120 (2009). ¶ 66 Constantin argues that the trial court did not offer any details regarding its award of attorney fees and their reasonableness, leaving this court little to review for an abuse of discretion. He argues that the only emergency petition that he filed was on December 28, 2016, for injunctive relief.

However, when an appeal concerns an award of attorney fees, we review it for an abuse of discretion. In re Marriage of Harrison , 388 Ill.App.3d 115, 120, 328 Ill.Dec. 90, 903 N.E.2d 750 (2009) ; Wildman, Harrold, Allen & Dixon v. Gaylord , 317 Ill.App.3d 590, 595, 251 Ill.Dec. 420, 740 N.E.2d 501 (2000). All reasonable presumptions are in favor of the action of the trial court, and, absent an affirmative showing to the contrary, the reviewing court will assume that the trial court understood and applied the law correctly.

Again, we do not agree. On this point, we give William the benefit of de novo review, as the relevant authority is unclear on the proper standard. For instance, in In re Marriage of Harrison, 388 Ill. App. 3d 115, 119-20 (2009), states that abuse-of-discretion review is required, but also states that an award of fees is mandatory if the court makes the relevant finding. But a manifest-error standard is the usual standard applicable to review of findings of fact made by a trial judge.

Further, "[t]he circuit court's decision to award or deny attorney fees will not be disturbed absent an abuse of discretion." In re Marriage of Harrison, 388 Ill. App. 3d 115, 120, 903 N.E.2d 750, 754 (2009).¶ 74 Additionally, section 506(b) of the Act (750 ILCS 5/506(b) (West 2012)) provides authority for the trial court to enter an order requiring the payment of fees and costs associated with a child representative or guardian ad litem.

We will not disturb a trial court's decision to award or deny attorney fees absent an abuse of discretion. In re Marriage of Harrison, 388 Ill. App. 3d 115, 120 (2009). ¶ 72 There are two bases under which to award fees under section 508(b), and both parties acknowledge that the trial court never made a finding regarding the first basis; namely, Thomas's failure to comply with a court order. Regarding the second basis, Thomas argues that the court never found that the hearing on his petition to modify maintenance was predicated or conducted for any improper purpose. We disagree. ¶ 73 Although the trial court did not use the explicit language "improper purpose," it is clear that it awarded fees under the second basis of section 508(b).

¶ 13 As respondent acknowledges, a trial court's decision to award or deny attorney fees under the Act will not be disturbed absent an abuse of discretion. In re Marriage of Harrison, 388 Ill. App. 3d 115, 120 (2009). A trial court abuses its discretion when it "acts arbitrarily, acts without conscientious judgment, or, in view of all of the circumstances, exceeds the bounds of reason and ignores recognized principles of law, resulting in substantial injustice."

A trial court's decision to award or deny attorney fees under the Act will not be disturbed absent an abuse of discretion. In re Marriage of Harrison, 388 Ill. App. 3d 115, 120 (2009). ¶ 93 Section 503(j) provides that "[a]fter proofs have closed in the final hearing on all other issues between the parties (or in conjunction with the final hearing, if all parties so stipulate) and before judgment is entered, a party's petition for contribution to fees and costs incurred in the proceeding shall be heard and decided."