If you have ever read any of the articles on my website, you can tell that I really like case law. Case law fills in the blanks when the statute favors brevity over detail. Case law explains the theory of the law. Case law even lays out the past decisions that have led to today’s jurisprudence. Reading case law will truly help you understand the law as a whole. As Isaac Newton said, “If I have seen further, it is by standing on the shoulders of giants.” However, not all case law is created equal. Case law is based on the concept of stare decisis. Stare decisis is “the doctrine of precedent, under which a court must follow earlier judicial decisions when the same points arise againt in litigation.” Black’s Law Dictionary (11th ed. 2019) If a court made a rule last year in a case. Another court should apply the same rule in a similar case this year. “The doctrine of stare decisis is the means by which courts ensure that the law will not merely change erratically, but will develop in a principled and intelligible fashion.” Chicago Bar Ass’n v. Illinois State Board of Elections, 161 Ill.2d 502, 510, 204 Ill.Dec. 301, 641 N.E.2d 525 (1994). The more recent the decision…the more powerful the stare decisis (we cannot be held to decisions based on antiquated notions). “Appellate court decisions issued prior to 1935 had no binding authority.” Bryson v. News America Publications, Inc., 672 NE 2d 1207 – Ill: Supreme Court 1996 Not all courts require stare decisis from other courts however. “`[S]tare decisis requires courts to follow the decisions of higher courts, but does not bind courts to follow decisions of equal or inferior courts.'” Gillen v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co., 215 Ill.2d 381, 392 n. 2, 294 Ill.Dec. 163, 830 N.E.2d 575 (2005), quoting Schiffner v. Motorola, Inc., 297 Ill.App.3d 1099, 1102, 232 Ill.Dec. 126, 697 N.E.2d 868 (1998). “Thus, the opinion of one district, division, or panel of the appellate court is not binding on other districts, divisions, or panels.” O’CASEK v. CHILDREN’S HOME AND AID SOC., 892 NE 2d 994 – Ill: Supreme Court 2008 An Illinois appellate court decision should be considered binding on trial courts all over Illinois. “A decision of the appellate court, though not binding on other appellate districts, is binding on the circuit courts throughout the State.” State Farm Fire and Cas. Co. v. Yapejian, 605 NE 2d 539 – Ill: Supreme Court 1992 Only when there is a difference between district stare decisis does it matter which district the trial court is located in. “A trial court, located in an appellate district where a conclusion on an issue is reached, should adhere to that conclusion and not to one promulgated in another district.” Garcia v. Hynes & Howes Real Estate, Inc., 331 NE 2d 634 – Ill: Appellate Court, 3rd Dist. 1975 “Illinois’ “internal” choice of law rule is that a state trial court is bound by the decisions of all the intermediate Appellate Courts, but is bound by the Appellate Court in its own district when the Appellate Courts differ.” Commercial Discount Corp. v. King, 552 F. Supp. 841 – Dist. Court, ND Illinois 1982 You will notice that I quote Illinois appellate decisions from all over Illinois for this reason (even though I practice primarily in the 1st district). You will also notice that I almost never quote case law from other states. Case law from other states almost never should be considered in an Illinois court of law. “Although they are not binding, comparable court decisions of other jurisdictions are persuasive authority and entitled to respect.” Kostal v. Pinkus Dermatopathology Lab., 827 NE 2d 1031 – Ill: Appellate Court, 1st Dist., 5th Div. 2005 (quotation and citation omitted) While you can bring up a foreign decision to an Illinois trial court, foreign court opinions are not binding on Illinois trial courts. “[I]t is well settled that decisions by courts from other states are not binding on courts of this state.” VG Marina Management Corp. v. Wiener, 882 NE 2d 196 – Ill: Appellate Court, 2nd Dist. 2008 “[T]he use of foreign decisions as persuasive authority is appropriate where Illinois authority on point is lacking or absent.” Carroll v. Curry, 912 NE 2d 272 – Ill: Appellate Court, 2nd Dist. 2009 Only when “[w]ithout established authority in Illinois, the court may choose to examine authority from other jurisdictions.” Shultz v. Atlantic Mut. Ins. Co., 853 NE 2d 94 – Ill: Appellate Court, 1st Dist., 1st Div. 2006 The same goes for federal court decisions…even if they’re in Illinois. “It is well settled that federal decisions are not binding on Illinois state courts. Despite the nonbinding nature of federal decisions, they can be considered to be persuasive authority, and they may be followed if the state court believes the federal analysis to be reasonable and logical.” Werderman v. Liberty Ventures, LLC, 857 NE 2d 320 – Ill: Appellate Court, 2nd Dist. 2006 (Citations Omitted) With tens of thousands of decisions issued by Illinois (one of the most populous states) since 1935…there will almost always be relevant, binding authority which will trump any foreign or federal authority. Lawyers use foreign authority because they hope an identical case…even if from another state will persuade a judge to rule the same way. Sorry, but that is not how it works. In Illinois, Illinois case law comes first…even if you don’t like it. A lawyer who knows the law is good. But, a lawyer who knows how the law actually works in conjunction with all the other laws is even better. Contact my Chicago, Illinois family law firm today to speak with an experienced Illinois divorce attorney. Via https://rdklegal.com/can-i-use-case-law-from-other-states-in-my-illinois-motions-and-pleadings/
0 Comments
“No, you didn’t have to stoop so low Some items matter; keepsakes, unique items, items with sentimental value. Illinois law is not operated by the rule of “finders keepers.” You can ask an Illinois court for what is rightfully yours. How do you get specific items back after a break-up in Illinois if you are married or unmarried? Getting Your Stuff Back In An Illinois Court If You Are Married If you were married to the person that has your stuff, there’s a very sophisticated labelling system to determine what is non-marital and, thus, non-divisible and what items are marital and, thus, divisible by the court. Until the divorce is granted, there is no absolute allocation of any disputed item. “[U]ntil a final determination is made by the trial court regarding the division of the disputed personal property pursuant to the petition for dissolution of marriage, [a party to a divorce] can claim no clear, ascertainable legal right to the exclusive possession of that property. At the present time, each party has an equal possessory right.” In re Marriage of Sherwin, 123 Ill. App. 3d 748, 753 (Ill. App. Ct. 1984) While the final say of who gets what does not happen until the end of the divorce case, an Illinois divorce court can order just about anything while the divorce case is pending. An Illinois divorce court can award “appropriate temporary relief…in the discretion of the court” 750 ILCS 5/501(a)(3) Either party can be awarded possession of an item and be ordered to keep the item safe until the final allocation of that item. An Illinois divorce court can order the “restraining any person from transferring, encumbering, concealing or otherwise disposing of any property except in the usual course of business or for the necessities of life” 750 ILCS 5/501(a)(2)(i) The “item” most people desire to keep and not divide is a pet. If the parties are married, the court effectively awards custody of that pet to the most worthy pet owner (or divides custody as they would with a child). “If the court finds that a companion animal of the parties is a marital asset, it shall allocate the sole or joint ownership of and responsibility for a companion animal of the parties. In issuing an order under this subsection, the court shall take into consideration the well-being of the companion animal.” 750 ILCS 5/503(n) Unmarried people cannot use the Illinois Marriage and Dissolution of Marriage Act to divide a pet’s time. Unmarried people may only use an “action in replevin” Replevin To Recover Items From Unmarried People In Illinois Replevin is “a lawsuit to repossess personal property wrongfully taken or detained by the defendant, whereby the plaintiff gives security for and holds the property until the court decides who owns it.” Black’s Law Dictionary (11th ed. 2019) “The primary purpose of the Replevin Act is to test the right to possession of personal property and place the successful party in possession.” ST Enterprises, Inc. v. Brunswick Corp., 315 NE 2d 1 – Ill: Supreme Court 1974 “Whenever any goods or chattels have been wrongfully distrained, or otherwise wrongfully taken or are wrongfully detained, an action of replevin may be brought for the recovery of such goods or chattels, by the owner or person entitled to their possession.” 735 ILCS 5/19-101 “Replevin is a strict statutory proceeding, and the statute must be followed precisely.” Carroll v. Curry, 912 NE 2d 272 – Ill: Appellate Court, 2nd Dist. 2009 Actions for replevin must be filed in the state and county where the items are located. “The venue provisions applicable to other civil cases shall apply to actions of replevin; and in addition an action of replevin may be brought in any county in which the goods or chattels or any part of them are located.” 735 ILCS 5/19-103 The complaint asking for the items must be specific in describing the items and why they belong the plaintiff. “An action of replevin shall be commenced by the filing of a verified complaint which describes the property to be replevied and states that the plaintiff in such action is the owner of the property so described, or that he or she is then lawfully entitled to the possession thereof, and that the property is wrongfully detained by the defendant, and that the same has not been taken for any tax, assessment, or fine levied by virtue of any law of this State, against the property of such plaintiff, or against him or her individually, nor seized under any lawful process against the goods and chattels of such plaintiff subject to such lawful process, nor held by virtue of any order for replevin against such plaintiff.” 735 ILCS 5/19-104 Notice is required for the party in possession to prepare their argument of why they should keep the item. “The defendant shall be given 5 days written notice in the manner required by rule of the Supreme Court, of a hearing before the court to contest the entry of an order for replevin. ” 735 ILCS 5/19-105 “[A] replevin action generally cannot be maintained until the plaintiff has made a demand for the surrender of the property and the defendant has refused. The purpose of the presuit demand is to afford the defendant an opportunity to return the property to the one entitled to possession without being put to the expense and annoyance of litigation. However, a demand is not necessary before bringing suit in a replevin action where the circumstances indicate its futility.” Carroll v. Curry, 912 NE 2d 272 – Ill: Appellate Court, 2nd Dist. 2009 Finally, a hearing is conducted to determine who the items belong to…at first blush. “At the hearing on the entry of an order for replevin…court shall review the basis of the plaintiff’s claim to possession. If the plaintiff establishes a prima facie case to a superior right to possession of the disputed property, and if the plaintiff also demonstrates to the court the probability that the plaintiff will ultimately prevail on the underlying claim to possession, the court shall so find as a matter of record and an order for replevin shall be entered by the court.” 735 ILCS 5/19-107 The plaintiff bears the burden to “allege and prove that he [or she] is lawfully entitled to possession of the property, that the defendant wrongfully detains the property and refuses to deliver the possession of the property to the plaintiff.” International Harvester Credit Corp. v. Helland, 130 Ill.App.3d 836, 838, 85 Ill.Dec. 922 If the court determines the property is theirs, the court can issue an order for the sheriff to pick up the item and deliver the item to it’s (now deemed proper) owner. “After holding a hearing on the matter, the court shall issue an order of replevin if plaintiff establishes a prima facie case to a superior right of possession of the property and if plaintiff also demonstrates to the court the probability that she will ultimately prevail on the underlying claim of the right to possession.” Koerner v. Nielsen, 8 NE 3d 161 – Ill: Appellate Court, 1st Dist., 1st Div. 2014 “The order for replevin shall require the sheriff, or other officer to whom it is directed to take the property, describing it as in the complaint, from the possession of the defendant, and deliver the same to the plaintiff unless such defendant executes a bond and security as hereinafter provided, and to summon the defendant to answer the complaint or otherwise appear in the action, or in case the property or any part thereof is not found and delivered to the sheriff or other officer, to answer to the plaintiff for the value of the same.” 735 ILCS 5/19-109 “If the defendant fails to deliver up to the sheriff the chattel which is the subject of the order for replevin and the plaintiff has a reasonable belief as to where the chattel is sequestered, the court may authorize the sheriff to use reasonable force to enter into the property to recover same upon such terms and conditions as the court may direct.” 735 ILCS 5/19-117 The defendant can at anytime defend their ownership of the item subject to replevin. “The defendant shall answer or otherwise appear as in other civil cases.” 735 ILCS 5/19-119 The defense to a replevin action is almost always, “It may have been theirs in the past but they gave it to me. Now it is mine.” “If plaintiff makes such a prima facie showing, the burden then shifts to defendant to establish the elements of a valid gift by clear, convincing and unequivocal evidence.” Koerner v. Nielsen, 8 NE 3d 161 – Ill: Appellate Court, 1st Dist., 1st Div. 2014 Engagement rings are a common subject of replevin actions. Engagement rings are conditional gifts. “[A]n engagement ring is a gift conditional on the subsequent marriage of the parties” Vann v. Vehrs, 633 NE 2d 102 – Ill: Appellate Court, 2nd Dist. 1994 “The law in Illinois appears established that a gift given in contemplation of marriage is deemed to be conditional on the subsequent marriage of the parties, and the party who fails to perform on the condition of the gift has no right to property acquired under such pretenses.” Harris v. Davis, 139 Ill. App. 3d 1046, 1048 (Ill. App. Ct. 1986) (citations omitted) The conditional gift of an engagement ring is conditioned on who rescinded from the offer to get married. “In a replevin action involving an engagement ring, the correct inquiry in deciding which party is entitled to possession of the ring is which party’s act conclusively ended the engagement.” Liceaga v. Baez, 126 NE 3d 682 – Ill: Appellate Court, 1st Dist., 4th Div. 2019 The details of the break down of the relationship are irrelevant to an Illinois court.. All that matters is determining which party broke off the engagement. “A court does not consider why an engagement ended, i.e. the underlying fault for the relationship’s breakdown, but only which party performed the act actually ending the engagement.” Liceaga v. Baez, 126 NE 3d 682 – Ill: Appellate Court, 1st Dist., 4th Div. 2019 Replevin must be distinguished from other court orders which deem that a party owes another party money and, therefore, their assets become attached. If that has happened…you cannot use replevin to get items to satisfy the judgement. “No action of replevin shall lie on behalf of a defendant against whom a judgment or attachment is in the process of enforcement, to recover goods or chattels seized by virtue thereof, unless such goods and chattels are exempted, by law, from such enforcement of the judgment or attachment; nor shall an action of replevin lie for such goods and chattels at the action of any other person, unless such other person has, at the time, a right to reduce the goods taken to his or her possession.” 735 ILCS 5/19-102 People get petty after a break up. They sell, give away or destroy items the other person would have wanted. If the item is no longer in existence or has disappeared, then the value of the item can be awarded by an Illinois court. “[I]n case the property or any part thereof is not found and delivered to the sheriff or other officer, to answer to the plaintiff for the value of the same.” 735 ILCS 5/19-109 The party requesting the item has an absolute right to that item if deemed to have the right of possession. The other party cannot force the court to allow them to buy it. “There is no authority, under the statute [the Replevin Act], for the court to render judgment for the value of the property, as in an action of trover, except in cases where it shall appear the officer was unable to obtain it on the replevin writ.” Kehoe v. Rounds, 69 Ill. 351, 353 (1873) If the item the party is seeking is given away (or sold) to a third party, it might be a fraudulent transfer which can be clawed back. “A transfer made or obligation incurred by a debtor is fraudulent as to a creditor, whether the creditor’s claim arose before or after the transfer was made or the obligation was incurred, if the debtor made the transfer or incurred the obligation:(1) with actual intent to hinder, delay, or defraud any creditor of the debtor; or (2) without receiving a reasonably equivalent value in exchange for the transfer or obligation” 740 ILCS 160/5(a) “”Claim” means a right to payment, whether or not the right is reduced to judgment, liquidated, unliquidated, fixed, contingent, matured, unmatured, disputed, undisputed, legal, equitable, secured, or unsecured.” 740 ILCS 160/2(c) Replevin only works if you do not have a judgment already. Claims can exist “whether or not the right is reduced to judgment” “To state a claim under that section [of the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act], a plaintiff must allege the existence of both a creditor/debtor relationship and a claim.” Reidy v. Reidy, Ill: Appellate Court, 1st Dist., 6th Div. 2021 “”Creditor” means a person who has a claim, including a claim for past-due child support.” 740 ILCS 160/2(d) “”Debtor” means a person who is liable on a claim.” 740 ILCS 160/2(f) If the court deems the transfer to be legitimate, the other party can NEVER ask for the item back. “[T]he law will not permit a party to deliberately place his property out of his control for a fraudulent purpose and then, through the intervention of a court of equity, regain title after his fraudulent purpose has been accomplished. Rather, the court will leave the parties as it finds them.” Gunn v. Sobucki, 837 NE 2d 865 – Ill: Supreme Court 2005 Splitting Up Real Estate Unmarried Couples Own If an unmarried couple owns real estate together, as in, both of their names are on the deed, they must divide the property (if they are disagreed) via a partition action. “When lands, tenements, or hereditaments are held in joint tenancy or tenancy in common,…or other form of co-ownership and regardless of whether any or all of the claimants are minors or adults, any one or more of the persons interested therein may compel a partition thereof by a verified complaint in the circuit court of the county where the premises or part of the premises are situated.” 735 ILCS 5/17-101 If only one member of the unmarried couple has their name on the deed to the real estate…the other party has no claim to that property…unless there was some arrangement in writing. “No action shall be brought to charge any person upon any contract for the sale of lands, tenements or hereditaments or any interest in or concerning them, for a longer term than one year, unless such contract or some memorandum or note thereof shall be in writing, and signed by the party to be charged therewith, or some other person thereunto by him lawfully authorized in writing, signed by such party.” 740 ILCS 80/2 If you would like your stuff back, contact my Chicago, Illinois family law firm to speak with an experienced Illinois divorce attorney. Via https://rdklegal.com/replevin-actions-against-spouses-and-other-exes-in-illinois/ It is one thing to get a child support order in Illinois. It is another thing to ensure the child support is paid. It is a further effort to ensure that the child support is paid in a timely manner. When child support is late, the payor or the payee must review the child support order to determine what (if any) penalties exist regarding late child support payments. The amount of child support in Illinois is calculated based on the monthly incomes of the two parents. “The court shall compute the basic child support obligation by taking the following steps:(A) determine each parent’s monthly net income;(B) add the parents’ monthly net incomes together to determine the combined monthly net income of the parents;(C) select the corresponding appropriate amount from the schedule of basic child support obligations based on the parties’ combined monthly net income and number of children of the parties; and(D) calculate each parent’s percentage share of the basic child support obligation.” 750 ILCS 5/505(A)(1.5) It logically follows that the payment of child support would happen on a monthly basis as the amount of child support was calculated on a monthly basis. However, there is no statute or case law requiring a particular frequency for child support. Therefore, whenever an Illinois court order says child support is due…any payment thereafter shall be considered “late” A child support order must specify an amount of support and a “periodic payment” “Order for support” means any order of the court which provides for periodic payment of funds for the support of a child or maintenance of a spouse, whether temporary or final” 750 ILCS 28/15 The “periodic payment” is then usually made via the child support payor’s employer through an income withholding order. The withholding order almost always breaks down the child support owed in periodic payments equal to when the employee gets paid (most often, bi-weekly). “[E]very order for support entered on or after July 1, 1997, shall…[r]equire an income withholding notice to be prepared and served immediately upon any payor of the obligor by the oblige unless a written agreement is reached between and signed by both parties providing for an alternative arrangement, approved and entered into the record by the court, which ensures payment of support.” 750 ILCS 28/20(a)(1) Late child support is really a problem for the obligor parent’s employer. “The failure of a payor, on more than one occasion, to pay amounts withheld to the State Disbursement Unit within 7 business days after the date the amount would have been paid or credited to the obligor creates a presumption that the payor knowingly failed to pay over the amounts.” 750 ILCS 28/35(a) (emphasis mine) If an employer does not withhold and forward child support to a parent due child support, a penalty fee can be calculated and assessed against the employer. “If the payor knowingly fails to withhold the amount designated in the income withholding notice or to pay any amount withheld to the State Disbursement Unit within 7 business days after the date the amount would have been paid or credited to the obligor, then the payor shall pay a penalty of $100 for each day that the amount designated in the income withholding notice (whether or not withheld by the payor) is not paid to the State Disbursement Unit after the period of 7 business days has expired.” 750 ILCS 28/35(a) If the parties agreed to not withhold child support and, instead, to agreed to pay child support directly from parent-to-parent a late child support payment can be addressed via a motion to enforce or a petition for indirect contempt of court. “A judgment of dissolution or of legal separation or of declaration of invalidity of marriage may be enforced…by order of court pursuant to petition…Any judgment entered within this State may be enforced…in the judicial circuit wherein such judgment was entered or last modified by the filing of a petition with notice mailed to the respondent at his last known address, or by the issuance of summons to the respondent.” 750 ILCS 5/511 A motion to enforce means the late child support payor has the opportunity to present a motion to modify child support at the same hearing should they conceive of any “substantial change in circumstance” (they always do). “An order for child support may be modified as follows… upon a showing of a substantial change in circumstance” 750 ILCS 5/510(a) Late child support is usually brought to the court’s attention as a contempt matter, instead. Contempt is “[t]he act of demeaning the court, preventing justice administration, or disobeying a sentence of the court.” Black’s Law Dictionary (11th ed. 2019) “A court is vested with inherent power to enforce its orders and preserve its dignity by the use of contempt proceedings.” People v. Warren, 173 Ill. 2d 348, 368, 671 N.E.2d 700, 710 (1996). Failure to pay child support on the date required by the order entered is indirect civil contempt. “Indirect contempt occurs outside the presence of the court and must therefore be proved by extrinsic evidence. Where an element of the offense is not observed by the judge and must be proved by testimony from third parties, then the accused contemnor must be given notice, a fair hearing and an opportunity to be heard.” Weglarz v. Bruck, 470 N.E.2d 21 (Ill. App. Ct. 1984) Late child support payors rarely get in trouble so long as they eventually pay the child support. “[A] court in any civil contempt proceeding must allow the contemnor an opportunity to purge his contempt. The purging provision in any civil contempt sanction for nonpayment must be based on the contemnor’s ability to pay.” In re Marriage of Dunseth, 260 Ill. App. 3d 816, 828 (Ill. App. Ct. 1994)(citations omitted) Illinois divorce courts do not really care when child support is paid…so long as child support is paid eventually. “[A] spouse is not injured because he is forced to pay the accumulated support in one lump sum as opposed to weekly payments as ordered.” Finley v. Finley, 410 NE 2d 12 – Ill: Supreme Court 1980 The only real penalty is the possibility of requiring the late child support payor to pay interest. “A decree of divorce that provides for weekly payments for support and maintenance for the children is a money decree and draws interest at the rate of 5% per annum until satisfied.” Gregory v. Gregory, 202 NE 2d 139 – Ill: Appellate Court, 5th Dist. 1964 At 5% interest, a $ 2000 child support payment would accrue $ 10 interest after being a month late. A $ 1000 child support payment would accrue $ 5 interest after being a month late. A $ 500 child support payment would accrue $ 2.50 interest after being a month late. The only way to effectively punish a late child support payor is to ask for attorney’s fees related to collecting the late child support. “The court from time to time, after due notice and hearing, and after considering the financial resources of the parties, may order any party to pay a reasonable amount for his own or the other party’s costs and attorney’s fees.” 750 ILCS 5/508 If the lateness is so pervasive, the court may even authorize putting the late child support payor’s assets in trust to ensure regular future payments. ‘The court if necessary to protect and promote the best interests of the children may set aside a portion of the jointly or separately held estates of the parties in a separate fund or trust for the support, maintenance, education, physical and mental health, and general welfare of any minor, dependent or incompetent child of the parties.’ 750 ILCS 5/503(g) “A need for such protection arises when the obligor spouse is either unwilling or unable to make child support payments. [Citations.]” In re Marriage of Popa & Garcia, 2013 IL App (1st) 130818, ¶ 23, citing In re Marriage of Steffen, 253 Ill. App. 3d 966, 969 (1993) Late child support payments are annoying at best and financially devastating at worst. Quit putting up with bad behavior and insist that child support payments be tendered promptly via a withholding order or a punitive motion. Contact my Chicago, Illinois family law firm today to discuss your late child support payments with an experienced Illinois divorce attorney. Via https://rdklegal.com/when-is-child-support-considered-late-in-illinois/ Lawyers are expensive. Good lawyers are REALLY expensive. As the old saying goes, “you get what you pay for.” In an Illinois divorce, there are a variety of ways a divorce litigant can ask the other side to pay for their attorney’s fees. “The court from time to time, after due notice and hearing, and after considering the financial resources of the parties, may order any party to pay a reasonable amount for his own or the other party’s costs and attorney’s fees.” 750 ILCS 5/508(a) Attorney’s fees can be awarded during the divorce proceedings based on who has the available financial resources. “[I]nterim attorney’s fees and costs” means attorney’s fees and costs, including an allowance from the other party for a retainer fee to obtain an attorney, assessed from time to time while a case is pending, in favor of the petitioning party’s current counsel, for reasonable fees and costs either already incurred or to be incurred, and “interim award” means an award of interim attorney’s fees and costs, including an allowance from the other party for a retainer fee to obtain an attorney.” 750 ILCS 5/501(c-1) Attorney’s fees can be awarded after the divorce proceedings based on who was awarded specific marital assets. “After 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” 750 ILCS 5/503(j) All of these attorney fee awards are paid to the attorney NOT the litigant requesting the fees. “The court may order that the award of attorney’s fees and costs (including an interim or contribution award) shall be paid directly to the attorney, who may enforce the order in his or her name” 750 ILCS 5/508(a) When a divorce litigant does not have an attorney, can that pro se litigant ask for attorney’s fees? When people represent themselves in an Illinois divorce court, they are held to the same standard as if they were an attorney. “A pro se litigant…is not entitled to more lenient treatment than attorneys. In Illinois, parties choosing to represent themselves without a lawyer must comply with the same rules and are held to the same standards as licensed attorneys.” Holzrichter v. Yorath, 369 Ill. Dec. 659, 674 (Ill. App. Ct. 2013) Pro se litigants will be treated as lawyers in an Illinois divorce court. The one thing a pro se litigant cannot do is ask for attorney’s fees (even if, they, themselves are an attorney). A “plaintiff’s status as an attorney proceeding pro se precludes him from recovering attorney fees.” Hamer v. Lentz, 547 NE 2d 191 – Ill: Supreme Court 1989 The Illinois Supreme Court explained that there are three reasons why Illinois courts will not award attorney’s fees to pro se litigants. “First, the award of fees is intended to relieve plaintiffs of the burden of legal costs; it is not intended as either a reward for plaintiffs or a penalty against the [defendant]. Since a pro se lawyer incurs no legal costs, the intent of the fee provision would not be served by granting fees to pro se lawyers. Second, the fee provision encourages plaintiffs to seek out legal advice in order to prevent unwarranted litigation. Although a pro se lawyer may have the requisite legal skills, he or she may lack the objectivity necessary to meet the aims of the statute. Third, the fee provision might be used by lawyers with an inactive practice solely to generate fees.” Hamer v. Lentz, 547 NE 2d 191 – Ill: Supreme Court 1989 (citing Aronson v. US Dept. of Housing and Urban Dev., 866 F. 2d 1 – Court of Appeals, 1st Circuit 1989) The bar against attorney’s fees for the self-represented has been held for Illinois divorce cases and their generous attorney’s fees statutes. “Lawyers representing themselves simply do not incur legal fees. Thus, attorneys who represent themselves in an action are not entitled to recover their own attorney fees.” In re Marriage of Tantiwongse, 863 NE 2d 1188 – Ill: Appellate Court, 3rd Dist. 2007 The exception to the rule that a lawyer cannot ask to have his own fees paid is if the pro se lawyer is defending against frivolous litigation. “To hold that an attorney cannot recover reasonable attorney fees in defending himself against frivolous litigation would clearly frustrate the purpose of Rule 137 and unfairly reward those who persist in maintaining frivolous litigation.” McCarthy v. Taylor, 155 NE 3d 359 – Ill: Supreme Court 2019 If you are struggling as a pro se litigant, please be advised that Abraham Lincoln once remarked that “a man who represents himself has a fool for a client.” I have taken over many a pro se divorce case to gracious relief of the judge overseeing the case. In lieu of that, I have provided consulting to the adamant pro se litigant to help them get the best possible result under their own representation. If you’d like to discuss getting my help, contact my Chicago, Ilinois family law firm to speak with an experienced Illinois divorce attorney. Via https://rdklegal.com/can-a-pro-se-litigant-ask-for-attorneys-fees-in-an-illinois-divorce/ While some people may buy 10 shares of Microsoft, an infinitesimal amount of stock with zero voting power, other people may buy stock that allows them to control a portion of the company. Upon a significant sale of stock, the remaining stockholders have a new business partner…and that business partner often has a spouse. The spouse of a stock purchaser will then be asked to sign what is called a “Spousal Consent Form.” Every spousal consent form is different but below is an example: “The undersigned spouse of [Spouse’s Name] (the “Purchaser”) has read, understands and hereby approves all the terms and conditions of that certain Stock Purchase Agreement dated as of [ ], (the “Agreement”), by and between [Name of] Corporation, a corporation (the “Company”), and the Purchaser, pursuant to which the Company granted to the Purchaser shares of common stock of the Company (the “Shares”). In consideration of the Company selling my spouse the Shares under the Agreement, I hereby agree to be irrevocably bound by all the terms and conditions of the Agreement (including but not limited to the Company’s Repurchase Option and Right of First Refusal, the Company’s limited irrevocable proxy and the market standoff agreements contained therein) and further agree that any community property interest I may have in the Shares will be similarly bound by the Agreement. I hereby appoint Purchaser as my attorney-in-fact, to act in my name, place and stead with respect to any amendment of, or exercise of any rights under, the Agreement. _______________________ [Non-Shareholding Spouse]” Upon the signing of a spousal consent form, the spouse relinquishes any rights to exercise the stock they might have under their state’s divorce laws. Spousal consent for stock purchase agreements exist in order to mitigate the risk that a spouse (or, more likely, an ex-spouse) may attempt to assert an interest in the shares. This new, surprise owner (who is fresh out of a divorce) can cause the company, as a whole, difficulty. Spousal consent forms are not as important in Illinois where there is no community property in divorce. Community property is the presumption that each spouse gets 50% of any asset either spouse acquired during the marriage. In Illinois, property can be divided almost any way a divorce court deems fair. Illinois divorce courts “shall divide the marital property without regard to marital misconduct in just proportions considering all relevant factors” 750 ILCS 5/503(d) It’s important to note that the relinquishment of the capacity to exercise the stock because of the stock-owner-spouse’s exclusive right to have an “irrevocable proxy” does not mean that the non-stock-owner-spouse relinquishes the value of the stock in a possible divorce. Share Transfer Restrictions And Spouses In Illinois In addition to the spousal consent form, a corporation’s shareholder agreement usually does not allow the stock-owning-spouse to unilaterally transfer their stock to the other spouse. “[T]he most likely purpose for share transfer restrictions in close corporations is to prevent outsiders from purchasing shares and potentially damaging the company.” Maurer v. Haines City Mobile Park & Sales, Inc., No. WD-00-051,2002 WL 479771, at 4 (Ohio Ct. App. March 29, 2002) While share transfer restrictions exist…courts do not like them. “As a general rule, provisions restricting a stockholder’s right to sell or transfer his stock are regarded with disfavor and are strictly construed.” 18A Am. Jur.2d Corporations § 683, 561 (1985) Most shareholder agreements include procedures for transfers that are involuntary. After all, every shareholder will eventually die. In the absence of language regarding involuntrary transfers, the presumption is that there is no restriction on involuntary transfers “[R]estrictions on the sale of corporate stock apply only to voluntary sales, and not to transfers by operation of law…in the absence of a specific provision to that effect.” 18 C.J.S. Corporations § 220 (1990) “[A] transfer of stock ordered by the court in a marriage dissolution proceeding is an involuntary transfer not prohibited under a corporation’s general restriction against transfers unless the restriction expressly prohibits involuntary transfers.” In re Marriage of Devick, 735 NE 2d 153 – Ill: Appellate Court, 2nd Dist. 2000) (citing In re Marriage of Banach, 489 NE 2d 363 – Ill: Appellate Court, 2nd Dist. 1986) “[U]nder the rule of strict construction, a restriction on the transfer of stock does not apply to interspousal transfers of stock which is marital property absent an express provision prohibiting such transfers.” In re Marriage of Devick, 735 NE 2d 153 – Ill: Appellate Court, 2nd Dist. 2000 (citing Bryan-Barber Realty, Inc. v. Fryar, 120 N.C.App. 178, 461 S.E.2d 29 (1995)) Because of the possibility of a spouse being automatically awarded voting shares in an Illinois divorce, when drafting “such a restrictive stock agreement, it may be necessary for the shareholder’s spouse to join in the agreement [via a spousal consent form]” In re Marriage of Devick, 735 NE 2d 153 – Ill: Appellate Court, 2nd Dist. 2000 (citing Bryan-Barber Realty, Inc. v. Fryar, 120 N.C.App. 178, 461 S.E.2d 29 (1995)) Share Transfer Restrictions In An Illinois Divorce In the absence of a stock transfer restriction, either spouse can buy the other spouse’s share in the stock. “If [a] stock does have value, [one party] has the option to purchase the [other party’s] interest at a nominal figure.” In re Marriage of Simmons, 409 NE 2d 321 – Ill: Appellate Court, 1st Dist. 1980 Or, in the absence of a stock transfer restriction, a court can divide any asset as it sees fit. “[T]he power “to divide the marital property” given the trial court by section 503(d) includes the powers necessary to render effective the power to divide.” In re Marriage of Banach, 489 NE 2d 363 – Ill: Appellate Court, 2nd Dist. 1986 Being a shareholder means owning a business. Illinois divorce courts prefer to award an entire business to one spouse with a cash offset to the spouse that is not awarded the business. “Courts have generally found it unwise to divide a business interest in kind because it would necessitate an ongoing business association between the parties. Therefore, where property, such as a business, is not susceptible to division in kind or such division would be inequitable, the court may, in its discretion, award the property to one spouse, subject to an obligation to pay the nonacquiring spouse for the interest lost. Such repayment may be made by offsetting other marital property or by payment in cash, either in gross or installments.” In re Marriage of Banach, 489 NE 2d 363 – Ill: Appellate Court, 2nd Dist. 1986 A shareholder agreement’s share transfer restrictions provide Illinois divorce courts with further encouragement to award a business and its share in their entirety to one spouse as shareholder agreements can operate as a post-nuptial agreement. Illinois divorce courts “shall divide the marital property without regard to marital misconduct in just proportions considering…any prenuptial or postnuptial agreement of the parties” 750 ILCS 5/503(d)(7) “[Post]nuptial agreements determining the rights of spouses to property or maintenance are valid and enforceable so long as (1) an unforeseen condition of penury is not created due to lack of property resources or lack of employability (2) the agreement is entered into with full knowledge and without fraud, duress, or coercion and (3) the agreement is fair and reasonable” Warren v. Warren, 523 NE 2d 680 – Ill: Appellate Court, 5th Dist. 1988 Nowhere in any spousal consent form will it be acknowledged that the share-holding spouse holds the shares as non-marital property not subject to division. Rather, the implication is that the share-holding-spouse will keep the shares as their part of the marital estate per the agreement between the two spouses and the corporation. The real issue is the value of the shares and the subsequent cash offset to the spouse who is not awarded the shares. The value of the shares in a closely held corporation may not be the true offset price. “In a close corporation the corporation’s shares are not listed on a stock exchange or actively dealt in by brokers and, therefore, there is no established market for the corporation’s stock. The shareholders of a close corporation, however, like those of any corporation, do realize a value from stock ownership in that they have certain rights of control or future profits. Furthermore, courts have recognized an ascertainable value for shares of stock in closely held corporations.” In re Marriage of Olsher, 397 NE 2d 488 – Ill: Appellate Court, 1st Dist. 1979 This means that experts must be hired to determine the value of the shares awarded to the share-holding spouse in order for the court to determine the offset amount (if any). If you cannot tell by now, business people can and will contract for anything…including the valuation of shares in the event of a divorce (so long as the non-member spouse also has the option to contest that valuation). “We see no reason why the trial court should have entered an order that conflicted with the terms of the operating agreement when the operating agreement specified the valuation process in the event of a divorce and allowed for the nonmember spouse to contest the valuation during divorce proceedings.” In re Marriage of Schlichting, 19 NE 3d 1055 – Ill: Appellate Court, 2nd Dist. 2014 Whether you know it or not…you are in business with your spouse. When you divorce your spouse, you divide that business based on the agreements between you, your spouse and the business. Legal concepts such as the statutes and case law enumerated above will fill in the gaps. So, be sure your divorce attorney understands your divorce, your business and the law in all its forms. Contact my Chicago, Illinois family law firm today to speak with an experienced Illinois divorce attorney. Via https://rdklegal.com/spousal-consent-for-stock-purchase-agreements-in-an-illinois-divorce/ In an Illinois divorce, the amount of maintenance (formerly known as alimony), the duration of maintenance, the modifiability of maintenance are all important considerations. The first step in considering maintenance in an Illinois divorce is to determine which spouse will be paying maintenance. Obviously, the spouse who makes more money pays maintenance (formerly known as alimony) to the other spouse in an Illinois divorce…but it is not so simple. Maintenance is far from automatic in Illinois. “Maintenance issues are presented in a great number of factual situations and resist a simple analysis.” In re Marriage of Mayhall, 311 Ill.App.3d 765, 769, 244 Ill.Dec. 227, 725 N.E.2d 22, 25 (2000) The spouse requesting maintenance must pass a series of subjective and objective tests in order for a court to order maintenance payments from the higher earning spouse. Is Maintenance Appropriate In Your Illinois Divorce? Before a single calculation is made, an Illinois divorce court must consider whether maintenance is even warranted to be considered. “Section 504(a) of the Illinois Marriage and Dissolution of Marriage Act…provides that the court may award temporary or permanent maintenance, and that the amount of maintenance and the time period during which maintenance is to be paid shall be determined after the court has considered all the relevant factors” In re Marriage of Carpenter, 677 NE 2d 463 – Ill: Appellate Court, 5th Dist. 1997 The actual language of this first test to deem maintenance appropriate is as follows: “In a proceeding for dissolution of marriage, legal separation, declaration of invalidity of marriage, or dissolution of a civil union, a proceeding for maintenance following a legal separation…the court may grant a maintenance award for either spouse in amounts and for periods of time as the court deems just, without regard to marital misconduct, and the maintenance may be paid from the income or property of the other spouse. The court shall first make a finding as to whether a maintenance award is appropriate, after consideration of all relevant factors, including: (1) the income and property of each party, including marital property apportioned and non-marital property assigned to the party seeking maintenance as well as all financial obligations imposed on the parties as a result of the dissolution of marriage;(2) the needs of each party;(3) the realistic present and future earning capacity of each party;(4) any impairment of the present and future earning capacity of the party seeking maintenance due to that party devoting time to domestic duties or having forgone or delayed education, training, employment, or career opportunities due to the marriage;(5) any impairment of the realistic present or future earning capacity of the party against whom maintenance is sought;(6) the time necessary to enable the party seeking maintenance to acquire appropriate education, training, and employment, and whether that party is able to support himself or herself through appropriate employment;(6.1) the effect of any parental responsibility arrangements and its effect on a party’s ability to seek or maintain employment;(7) the standard of living established during the marriage;(8) the duration of the marriage;(9) the age, health, station, occupation, amount and sources of income, vocational skills, employability, estate, liabilities, and the needs of each of the parties;(10) all sources of public and private income including, without limitation, disability and retirement income;(11) the tax consequences to each party ;(12) contributions and services by the party seeking maintenance to the education, training, career or career potential, or license of the other spouse;(13) any valid agreement of the parties; and(14) any other factor that the court expressly finds to be just and equitable.” 750 ILCS 5/504(a) These statutory factors are not to be weighted equally. “The court is not required to give the factors equal weight and has broad discretion to ‘grant a temporary or permanent maintenance award for either spouse in amounts and for periods of time as the court deems just.’” In re Marriage of Reynard, 801 NE 2d 591 – Ill: Appellate Court, 4th Dist. 2003 With 14 different factors for the court to base an award of maintenance…maintenance is very likely to be deemed appropriate in any Illinois divorce. The most salient factor is 750 ILCS 5/504(a)(3) “the realistic present and future earning capacity of each party.” The current and future incomes of both parties determine the needs and capacity to pay of each party. This is the point of maintenance in an Illinois divorce. “[W]hen former spouses have grossly disparate earning potentials, the goal of financial independence may not be achievable because of the dependent former spouse’s inability to maintain the standard of living shared during the marriage.” In re Marriage of Charles, 284 Ill.App.3d 339, 348, 219 Ill.Dec. 742, 672 N.E.2d 57, 64 (1996). When a couple lived together…they had the same lifestyle. A difference in incomes is going to mean someone is going to have to pay the other to maintain that lifestyle. Again, this initial almost always deems maintenance appropriate in an Illinois divorce. The subsequent, more mathematical, steps can often deny maintenance even if maintenance is deemed appropriate. Is The Income Differential Enough To Award Maintenance In An Illinois Divorce? Maintenance awards cannot allow the spouse receiving maintenance to earn more than 40% of the total combined incomes of the two parties to an Illinois divorce. “The amount calculated as maintenance, however, when added to the net income of the payee, shall not result in the payee receiving an amount that is in excess of 40% of the combined net income of the parties.” 750 ILCS 5/503(b-1)(1)(A) If a spouse earns more than 67% or more of their spouse’s income…they are not getting a maintenance award in an Illinois divorce. Conversely, if a spouse makes less than 150% of their spouse’s income…the higher earning spouse will not have to pay maintenance in an Illinois divorce. If the incomes of the spouses even warrants maintenance, the maintenance is still reduced to the point that the maintenance receiver cannot receive maintenance that would cause them to have more 40% of the total income including their maintenance payment. The higher earning spouse has to make at least 300% more than the lower earning spouse to not have their income payment affected by this 40% total income cap. The maintenance owed is then determined by “the guidelines” “[I]f the court finds that a maintenance award is appropriate, the court shall order guideline maintenance” 750 ILCS 5/503(b-1) The guidelines maintenance calculation is as follows: “Maintenance…shall be calculated by taking 33 1/3% of the payor’s net annual income minus 25% of the payee’s net annual income.” 750 ILCS 5/503(b-1)(1)(A) There are no guidelines calculations for relatively wealthy couples. “[i]f the combined gross annual income of the parties is less than $500,000 and the payor has no obligation to pay child support or maintenance or both from a prior relationship” 750 ILCS 5/504(b-1)(1) At a joint income of $500,000 or higher the bigger earning spouse can be expected to pay some kind of maintenance unless the other spouse is making an equivalent salary. Avoiding Maintenance In An Illinois Divorce The possibility of paying maintenance is stress inducing. Starting a new life with a continuing obligation to your former partner is no one’s idea of a new chapter. In order to avoid maintenance, the parties can come to an agreement that maintenance will be waived by both parties. “If the parties decide to settle their property rights by mutual agreement rather than by statute, they are bound to the terms of their agreement.” In re Marriage of McLauchlan, 2012 IL App (1st) 102114, “To promote amicable settlement of disputes between parties to a marriage attendant upon the dissolution of their marriage, the parties may enter into an agreement containing provisions for disposition of any property owned by either of them, maintenance of either of them, support, parental responsibility allocation of their children, and support of their children” 750 ILCS 5/502(a) Maintenance is never mandatory if there is an agreement to waive maintenance. An Illinois divorce court cannot suggest otherwise. “The terms of the agreement, except those providing for the support and parental responsibility allocation of children, are binding upon the court unless it finds, after considering the economic circumstances of the parties and any other relevant evidence produced by the parties, on their own motion or on request of the court, that the agreement is unconscionable.” 750 ILCS 5/502(b) Getting the lesser earning spouse to agree to waive maintenance will require some kind of quid pro quo. Invariably, the spouse that should pay maintenance will have to offer some kind of buyout to the other spouse to avoid maintenance. Once the buyout in lieu of maintenance is agreed to, it can never be undone. “Property provisions of an agreement are never modifiable.” 750 ILCS 5/502(f) “A property settlement in lieu of maintenance is nonmodifiable.” In re Marriage of Rowden, 516 NE 2d 1041 – Ill: Appellate Court, 3rd Dist. 1987 Guaranteeing Maintenance In An Illinois Divorce Getting a maintenance award in an Illinois divorce is only the beginning. Maintenance cannot be guaranteed after an Illinois divorce except by agreement of the parties. “Under Illinois law, all maintenance awards are reviewable.” In re Marriage of Kasprzyk, 2019 IL App (4th) 170838. “An order for maintenance may be modified or terminated only upon a showing of a substantial change in circumstances” 750 ILCS 5/510(a-5) “There is no precise formula for a substantial change in circumstances.” In re Marriage of Solecki, 2020 IL App (2d) 190381 Given enough time, a person who does not want to pay maintenance is going to find a way to trigger a substantial change in circumstances. The only way to avoid a modification of maintenance is to contract for non-modifiable maintenance. “The parties may provide that maintenance is non-modifiable in amount, duration, or both. If the parties do not provide that maintenance is non-modifiable in amount, duration, or both, then those terms are modifiable upon a substantial change of circumstances….The judgment may expressly preclude or limit modification of other terms set forth in the judgment if the agreement so provides .Otherwise, terms of an agreement set forth in the judgment are automatically modified by modification of the judgment.” 750 ILCS 5/502(f) There are many different ways to think about a maintenance obligation in an Illinois divorce. Be sure that your divorce attorney has thought of all of the ways the Illinois Marriage and Dissolution of Marriage Act and the relevant case law can help…or hurt you. Contact my Chicago, Illinois family law firm today to speak with an experienced Illinois divorce attorney. Via https://rdklegal.com/which-spouse-pays-maintenance-in-an-illinois-divorce/ Maintenance (formerly known as alimony) in Illinois is an ongoing obligation for a set amount per month over a set duration of time. Most people would simply prefer to be finished with their ex-spouse instead of paying their ex-spouse monthly or, conversely, the ex-spouse hoping they will be paid every month. In lieu of entering into an agreement for monthly maintenance payments, the parties to an Illinois divorce may arrange for the maintenance payor to “buy out” the maintenance receiver with a lump-sum payment. Not only does this eliminate ongoing contact between the parties but it also removes the possibility of future litigation over maintenance modification while providing significant tax benefits to the maintenance payor. How Is Maintenance Calculated In An Illinois Divorce? An Illinois divorce court must first determine if maintenance is appropriate in the divorce before them. A variety of factors are listed that the court may consider…but, in general, maintenance is always deemed appropriate so long as the parties only recently separated. “[I]f the court finds that a maintenance award is appropriate, the court shall order guideline maintenance” 750 ILCS 5/503(b-1) “Guidelines maintenance” is the official formula by which maintenance is to be calculated in amount and duration. “Maintenance…shall be calculated by taking 33 1/3% of the payor’s net annual income minus 25% of the payee’s net annual income.” 750 ILCS 5/503(b-1)(1)(A) The 25% deduction from the payee’s income almost never makes a significant difference (their income is way smaller) but the relative size of the payee’s income creates a huge stopgap. “The amount calculated as maintenance, however, when added to the net income of the payee, shall not result in the payee receiving an amount that is in excess of 40% of the combined net income of the parties.” 750 ILCS 5/503(b-1)(1)(A)(emphasis mine) Only if the maintenance payor makes three times the income of the payee will the maintenance payor’s payment not be impacted by this 40% cap. These maintenance guidelines only apply to divorcing couples making less than $ 500,000 annually combined. Guidelines maintenance does not apply “[i]f the combined gross annual income of the parties is less than $500,000 and the payor has no obligation to pay child support or maintenance or both from a prior relationship” 750 ILCS 5/504(b-1)(1) What amount of maintenance is required do couples who make in excess of $ 500,000 annually combined? There is no calculated amount. The court awards a maintenance amount that it believes is just after reviewing the same 14 factors that allowed maintenance to be acceptable. “Any non-guidelines award of maintenance shall be made after the court’s consideration of all relevant factors.” 750 ILCS 5/504(b-1)(2) Once the monthly maintenance amount is determined, the court can then determine the duration of that maintenance. The duration of maintenance is based on the length of the marriage (at least up until the filing of the Petition for Dissolution of Marriage) “The duration of an award [of maintenance] shall be calculated by multiplying the length of the marriage at the time the action was commenced by whichever of the following factors applies: less than 5 years (.20); 5 years or more but less than 6 years (.24); 6 years or more but less than 7 years (.28); 7 years or more but less than 8 years (.32); 8 years or more but less than 9 years (.36); 9 years or more but less than 10 years (.40); 10 years or more but less than 11 years (.44); 11 years or more but less than 12 years (.48); 12 years or more but less than 13 years (.52); 13 years or more but less than 14 years (.56); 14 years or more but less than 15 years (.60); 15 years or more but less than 16 years (.64); 16 years or more but less than 17 years (.68); 17 years or more but less than 18 years (.72); 18 years or more but less than 19 years (.76); 19 years or more but less than 20 years (.80). For a marriage of 20 or more years, the court, in its discretion, shall order maintenance for a period equal to the length of the marriage or for an indefinite term.” 750 ILCS 5/504(b-1)(1)(B) The total maintenance owed over the course of the parties’ lives can now be accurately calculated. (Monthly Maintenance Amount) X (Number Of Months Maintenance Is To Be Owed) Determining The Maintenance Buyout Amount In An Illinois Divorce The total amount of maintenance to be paid can be used to calculate the net present value of the maintenance. Net present value is “the present value of a net cash flow from a project, discounted by the cost of capital.” Black’s Law Dictionary (11th ed. 2019) Net present value = cash flow(1+i)t, where i=discount rate and t=number of time periods. No one calculates net present value by hand. Everyone uses an Excel function. This is why Excel exists…to estimate the financial future. For example, 5 years of $ 1000 monthly maintenance may be $ 60,000 total. But, the present value at a 7% interest rate is $ 50,506.81 Note: The discount rate often parallels the rate of inflation. If inflation is relatively high (like it is as of the date of this writing) make a buyout offer now as the higher discount rate reduce the buyout amount. Once the net present value of the maintenance payments is determined and offer can be made to buy out those payments based on the net present value. Typically, the buyout is made from a portion of the share of marital assets the maintenance payor would have been awarded. A maintenance buyout will be approved by the court because maintenance can be deemed inapproptiate based on the “property of each party, marital property apportioned and non-marital property assigned to the party seeking maintenance” 750 ILCS 5/504(a)(1) Likewise, Illinois divorce courts will approve a lop-sided property settlement in lieu of maintenance by considering “whether the apportionment is in lieu of or in addition to maintenance” 750 ILCS 5/503(d)(10) While property transfers in lieu of maintenance almost always happen by agreement, transfers of marital property in lieu of maintenance can be ordered by the court. “The trial court has broad discretion in applying the factors enumerated and is authorized to award either property or maintenance, both property and maintenance, or property in lieu of maintenance.” In re Marriage of Jones, 543 NE 2d 119 – Ill: Appellate Court, 1st Dist. 1989 However, there is subsequent case authority that says courts should NOT order a property division in lieu of maintenance. “[T]he [Marriage and Dissolution of Marriage] Act implicitly provides for an award of property in lieu of maintenance, but it does not provide for an award of maintenance in lieu of property. We hold that an award of maintenance in lieu of property is improper.” In re Marriage of Brackett, 722 NE 2d 287 – Ill: Appellate Court, 2nd Dist. 1999 (Citations omitted) The maintenance payor will further discount the offer because they may die, lose their job or their ex-spouse may remarry or gain better employment. The maintenance receiver will scoff and suggest that a maintenance buyout creates a tax windfall for the maintenance payor and the two parties should share in that windfall. The Tax Implications Of A Maintenance Buyout In An Illinois Divorce A maintenance buyout is a “transfer of property incident to divorce.” Such transfers have zero tax consequence to either party. “No gain or loss shall be recognized on a transfer of property from an individual to (or in trust for the benefit of) The payments of maintenance get no tax deduction for divorces entered after January 1, 2019. This is in stark contrast to when maintenance payments used to be deductible to the payor. “In the case of an individual, there shall be allowed as a deduction an amount equal to the alimony or separate maintenance payments paid during such individual’s taxable year.” 26 USC § 215(a) (2011) Also, pre-2019, maintenance payments were taxable to the maintenance payee. “Gross income includes amounts received as alimony or separate maintenance payments” 26 U.S. Code Section 71(a)(2011) Both of those provisions of the tax code have been struck leaving the maintenance payor with the burden of paying taxes on their income even if they subsequently pay out that income to their ex-spouse. This is a tax on money the maintenance payor does not even get to keep. The maintenance receiver is not impacted tax-wise at all if they are paid in a lump sum or on a monthly ongoing basis. The wise maintenance receiver will therefore want to increase their lump sum amount in exchange for saving the maintenance payor thousands in future taxes. The Finality Of A Maintenance Buyout In An Illinois Divorce The wise maintenance receiver will also accept a maintenance buyout because they will truly know their financial situation as the maintenance has become a property distribution…which is non-modifiable. “The provisions as to property disposition may not be revoked or modified, unless the court finds the existence of conditions that justify the reopening of a judgment under the laws of this State.” 750 ILCS 5/510(b) “Property provisions of an agreement are never modifiable.” 750 ILCS 5/502(f) “A property settlement in lieu of maintenance is nonmodifiable.” In re Marriage of Rowden, 516 NE 2d 1041 – Ill: Appellate Court, 3rd Dist. 1987 Even non-modifiable maintenance stops if either party dies. “[T]he obligation to pay future maintenance is terminated upon the death of either party” 750 ILCS 510(c) Virtually all long-term maintenance amounts get modified in the future. “Under Illinois law, all maintenance awards are reviewable.” In re Marriage of Kasprzyk, 2019 IL App (4th) 170838, ¶ 23 Retirement or job loss of the payor reduces maintenance. Likewise, cohabitation or job gain of the payee also reduces maintenance. Almost nothing modifies maintenance upwards. A maintenance buyout is often the final negotiated point for both parties to an Illinois divorce. As the old proverb advises, “a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.” If you would like to negotiated a maintenance buyout in your Illinois divorce contact my Chicago, Illinois family law firm to speak with an experienced Illinois divorce attorney. Via https://rdklegal.com/maintenance-buyout-in-an-illinois-divorce/ People who get divorced yell at each other…a lot. While we are only human, there is a level of anger is impermissible and, likely, dangerous. When one party to a divorce in Illinois is frequently screaming, breaking things, and making threats anger management classes can be ordered. Usually, anger leads to some kind of abuse which warrants a petition for an order of protection. “If the court finds that petitioner has been abused by a family or household member…an order of protection prohibiting the abuse, neglect, or exploitation shall issue” 750 ILCS 60/214 “’Abuse’ means physical abuse, harassment, intimidation of a dependent, interference with personal liberty or willful deprivation” 750 ILCS 60/103(1) “Harassment” means knowing conduct which is not necessary to accomplish a purpose that is reasonable under the circumstances; would cause a reasonable person emotional distress; and does cause emotional distress to the petitioner.“ 750 ILCS 60/103(7) Almost any angry action could be harassment under the above statute’s definition. But the below instances are all definitely “harassment” under the statute. “Unless the presumption is rebutted by a preponderance of the evidence, the following types of conduct shall be presumed to cause emotional distress: (i) creating a disturbance at petitioner’s place of employment or school;(ii) repeatedly telephoning petitioner’s place of employment, home or residence;c(iii) repeatedly following petitioner about in a public place or places;c(iv) repeatedly keeping petitioner under surveillance by remaining present outside his or her home, school, place of employment, vehicle or other place occupied by petitioner or by peering in petitioner’s windows;c(v) improperly concealing a minor child from petitioner, repeatedly threatening to improperly remove a minor child of petitioner’s from the jurisdiction or from the physical care of petitioner, repeatedly threatening to conceal a minor child from petitioner, or making a single such threat following an actual or attempted improper removal or concealment, unless respondent was fleeing an incident or pattern of domestic violence; or (vi) threatening physical force, confinement or restraint on one or more occasions.” 750 ILCS 60/103(7) Sooner or later, the truly angry will “threaten[] physical force” per the statute. Testimony that a spouse made a threat is sufficient evidence of the emotional abuse. “The Illinois Domestic Violence Act of 1986 [requires that] there must be some evidence in the record to support the relief requested.” In re Marriage of Healy, 635 NE 2d 666 – Ill: Appellate Court, 1st Dist., 2nd Div. 1994 (citations and quotations omitted) “[T]estimony is evidence.” People ex rel. Hartigan v. ILL. COMMERCE COM’N, 592 NE 2d 1066 – Ill: Supreme Court 1992 One spouse saying that the other spouse said something is not just “he said/she said.” Testimony about the other party’s words is perfectly acceptable non-hearsay evidence. “A statement is not hearsay if…The statement is offered against a party and is (A) the party’s own statement” Ill. R. Evid. 801(d)(2) Once the order of protection is granted…the abuser may now have to attend some kind of court ordered counseling which could include anger management classes. “Require or recommend the respondent to undergo counseling for a specified duration with a social worker, psychologist, clinical psychologist, psychiatrist, family service agency, alcohol or substance abuse program, mental health center guidance counselor, agency providing services to elders, program designed for domestic violence abusers or any other guidance service the court deems appropriate. The Court may order the respondent in any intimate partner relationship to report to an Illinois Department of Human Services protocol approved partner abuse intervention program for an assessment and to follow all recommended treatment.” 750 ILCS 60/214(b)(4) Along with counseling, the respondent in an Illinois order of protection case must surrender their guns to the Sheriff until the order of protection is lifted. “A person who is subject to an existing domestic violence order of protection issued under this Code may not lawfully possess weapons under Section 8.2 of the Firearm Owners Identification Card Act.” 725 Ill. Comp. Stat. 5/112A-14(b)(14.5)(A) If the angry outburst was not so stark, singular and threatening as to warrant an order of protection, a divorcing or divorced party can still request anger management from the courts…but only if the parties to a divorce share children together. An Illinois divorce court can order “individual counseling for the child, family counseling for one or more of the parties and the child, or parental education for one or more of the parties” if the court finds that “(1) both parents or all parties agree to the order; (2) the child’s physical health is endangered or that the child’s emotional development is impaired; (3) abuse of allocated parenting time under Section 607.5 has occurred; or (4) one or both of the parties have violated the allocation judgment with regard to conduct affecting or in the presence of the child.” 750 ILCS 5/607.6 The appropriate counseling will almost always be recommended by a Guardian Ad Litem. “In any proceedings involving the support, custody, visitation, allocation of parental responsibilities, education, parentage, property interest, or general welfare of a minor or dependent child, the court may, on its own motion or that of any party, appoint an attorney [called a Guardian Ad Litem] to [represent the best interests of the children]” 750 ILCS 5/506. “The guardian ad litem shall investigate the facts of the case and interview the child and the parties.” 750 ILCS 5/506(a)(2) The guardian ad litem, through a series of interviews and suggested appointments, determines whether counseling such as anger management would benefit the children and the parties. “[A] guardian ad litem…shall consider the nature and adequacy of the evidence to be presented by the parties and the availability of other methods of obtaining information, including social service organizations and evaluations by mental health professions as well as resources for payment.” 750 ILCS 5/506(a-5) The guardian ad litem then makes their recommendations available to the parties, their attorneys and the judge. “The guardian ad litem shall testify or submit a written report to the court regarding his or her recommendations in accordance with the best interest of the child. The report shall be made available to all parties.” 750 ILCS 5/506(a)(2) If an Illinois divorce judge sees a recommendation for anger management classes…that judge is going to order anger management classes. After all, what is the harm of therapy? While the court waits on a parent to take anger management classes, the court will likely remove the children from the angry parent. A court can enter “an order granting the temporary custody of…[the] children to [one parent], the court having found that [the other parent] has serious anger-management issues and has yelled, screamed, used foul language, and made derogatory comments toward the children.” IN RE MARRIAGE OF CASEY, 867 NE 2d 555 – Ill: Appellate Court, 5th Dist. 2007 The court can enter orders restricting parenting time and decision-making while “requiring a parent to complete a treatment program for perpetrators of abuse…or for other behavior that is the basis for restricting parental responsibilities.” 750 ILCS 5/603.10(a)(8) If your spouse or ex-spouse needs anger management classes but you do not have children together…just stay away from your spouse/former spouse. Nothing requires you to communicate during or after an Illinois divorce with your spouse/former spouse. If unwanted communication becomes harassing, pursue an order of protection as described above. If a party believes that their spouse or ex-spouse’s anger issues are so deep seated and pervasive that they need to be clarified for the court to make the appropriate therapy recommendations, a party can request a court ordered mental examination (known as a “215” in Illinois). “In any action in which the physical or mental condition of a party or of a person in the party’s custody or legal control is in controversy, the court, upon notice and on motion made within a reasonable time before the trial, may order such party to submit to a physical or mental examination by a licensed professional in a discipline related to the physical or mental condition which is involved.” Ill. Sup. Ct. R. 215 The mental examination and its results are not determinative. The point of a mental examination is to give the court the information the court needs to make the appropriate orders for the parties and their children. “The purpose of…rule [215] is to allow discovery that will assist the trier of fact in reaching its determination.” In re Estate of Silverman, 628 NE 2d 763 – Ill: Appellate Court, 1st Dist., 2nd Div. 1993 Dealing with a hot-headed spouse is terrible. Raising children with an angry parent is almost impossible. Thankfully, the family law court system seems to calm things down. Family law’s emphasis on thoughtful procedure may be nerve-wracking when you just want to divide your assets, set support and establish parenting time. Believe it or not, the courts can provide the resources and the paths forward for the parties and their children to thrive as co-parents in the future. If you would like to talk about the various therapies that are available to you and your spouse during and after your divorce, contact my Chicago, Illinois family law firm to speak with an experienced Illinois divorce attorney. Via https://rdklegal.com/anger-management-classes-in-an-illinois-divorce/ Parents get time with their children during and after an Illinois divorce. “Unless the parents present a mutually agreed written parenting plan and that plan is approved by the court, the court shall allocate parenting time.” 750 ILCS 5/602.7 A court order to see a child is one thing. Enforcing a child visitation order and actually spending time with the child is another. Exercising parenting time both becomes easier and harder as a child gets older. A parent can simply text their teenage child (they hate phone calls) and ask to spend time with the child. If the child wishes to spend time with that parent…what is the other parent going to do? The reverse is also true, however. If a teenage child does not wish to spend time with a parent…there is little that can be done to force that adult-sized child to spend time with the other parent. The parent the child willingly spends time with must encourage the child to spend time with the other parent pursuant to the Allocation of Parenting Time and Parental Responsibilities. “Illinois courts have held that a custodial parent may not disregard the visitation requirements of a dissolution judgment merely because his or her children do not desire to visit the noncustodial parent. Where a dissolution judgment places the ultimate responsibility for compliance with the visitation provisions upon the custodial parent, the custodial parent cannot escape his or her duty to comply with the visitation provisions by attempting to shift this burden to the discretion of his or her children. A parent must comply with court-ordered visitation even where the child has expressed hostility toward the other parent.” In re Marriage of Charous, 855 NE 2d 953 – Ill: Appellate Court, 2nd Dist. 2006 (citations and quotations omitted) When a child refuses to visit a parent and there is nothing that the other parent can realistically do to encourage visitation with a stubborn child, that other parent will not be punished by the courts. “[A]n alleged contemnor cannot be held in contempt when he or she is unable to comply through no fault of his or her own” In re Marriage of Tatham, 688 NE 2d 864 – Ill: Appellate Court, 5th Dist. 1997 Of course, enforcement of parenting time only applies to children. Once a child is 18, they are no longer a child and parenting time orders no longe “[T]he age of majority in Illinois is 18” In re EG, 549 NE 2d 322 – Ill: Supreme Court 1989 “Minor” means a person…under the age of 18 years” 750 ILCS 30/3-1 “In Illinois, a child who attains the age of 18 years is of legal age.” In re Marriage of Donahoe, 448 NE 2d 1030 – Ill: Appellate Court, 2nd Dist. 1983 The right to visit a child is not to be confused with the fact that child support can continue beyond age 18. For child support ONLY, “the term “child” shall include any child under age 18 and any child age 19 or younger who is still attending high school.” 750 ILCS 5/505(a) Illinois courts will not order adult children to visit their parents or order other adults to enforce/encourage the visitation of an adult child. An Illinois court “lacks jurisdiction under the Marriage Act to enter a visitation order against a person who has attained majority.” In re Marriage of Casarotto, 736 NE 2d 1169 – Ill: Appellate Court, 1st Dist., 5th Div. 2000 After the child turns 18 there is no way to punish a custodial parent the previous lack of visitations. “Civil contempt is a coercive sanction rather than a punishment for past contumacious conduct. For this reason, a valid purge condition is a necessary part of an indirect civil contempt order. A contemnor must be able to purge the civil contempt by doing that which the court has ordered him to do…Once [a child] turn[s] 18, it bec[omes] impossible for [the other parent] to purge the civil contempt imposed by the circuit court. [A parent] cannot compel [a child who is], an adult, to visit [anyone]. Because [a parent] can no longer compel Katie to visit Geraldine, the rationale for the civil contempt order in this case has been lost.” Felzak v. Hruby, 876 NE 2d 650 – Ill: Supreme Court 2007 Even an adult child who is deemed disabled so that a guardian is appointed to make decisions for the disabled child can refuse to see a parent. “The guardian shall consider the ward’s current preferences” 755 ILCS 5/11a-17(e) Sadly, parents who insist on seeing their adult children…it usually ends in an order of protection. “If the court finds that petitioner has been abused by a family or household member…an order of protection prohibiting the abuse, neglect, or exploitation shall issue” 750 ILCS 60/214 “’Abuse’ means physical abuse, harassment, intimidation of a dependent, interference with personal liberty or willful deprivation” 750 ILCS 60/103(1) ““Harassment” means knowing conduct which is not necessary to accomplish a purpose that is reasonable under the circumstances; would cause a reasonable person emotional distress; and does cause emotional distress to the petitioner.” 750 ILCS 60/103(7) Who could disagree that an estranged parent insisting on your attention would not “cause a reasonable person emotional distress?” If you are trying to connect with an older child…please tread carefully. If your parent or your adult child’s parent is determined to spend time with the child…tell the parent that they missed their chance. Parenting time disputes are best handled delicately by an experienced divorce lawyer. So, contact my Chicago, Illinois family law firm to schedule an appointment to discuss your case. Via https://rdklegal.com/can-a-parent-demand-to-visit-an-adult-child-in-illinois/ When a marriage breaks down, there is always a loss of trust. Verifying the details of your spouse’s life requires a full disclosure from your spouse…and verification of the details from third parties. In an Illinois court of law, verification of facts from third parties is done via subpoena. A subpoena is “a writ or order commanding a person to appear before a court or other tribunal, subject to a penalty for failing to comply.” Black’s Law Dictionary (11th ed. 2019) Most subpoenas will substitute a person actually coming to court for merely providing the records requested of them. In Illinois, attorneys can issue subpoenas to anyone for anything (within reason) under the power of the court “An attorney admitted to practice in the State of Illinois, as an officer of the court, may also issue subpoenas on behalf of the court for witnesses and to counties in a pending action.” 735 ILCS 5/2-1101 “[S]ubpoenas may be issued by an attorney admitted to practice in the State of Illinois who is currently counsel of record in the pending action. The subpoena may command the person to whom it is directed to produce documents or tangible things which constitute or contain evidence relating to any of the matters within the scope of the examination permitted under these rules” Ill. Sup. Ct. R. 204(a)(1) Once the target of the subpoena has the received notice of the subpoena, they must comply within a reasonable time frame. Failure to comply with a subpoena’s request can result in the party that issued the subpoena requesting a motion to compel. “If a party or other deponent refuses…a request for the production of documents…the party serving the request may on like notice move for an order compelling an answer or compliance with the request.” Ill. Sup. Ct. R. 219(a) A third-party who received a subpoena and has not responded to the subpoena is not under the jurisdiction of the court until that third-party is made a party to the divorce case. Illinois domestic relations courts can liberally include parties in their divorce cases. “The court may join additional parties necessary and proper for the exercise of its authority under this Act.” 750 ILCS 5/403(d) Once included in the divorce, the party will be ordered to compel production pursuant to the subpoena’s written request (so long as there is no pending objection). Failure to produce the documents after an order to compel production is issued will allow the subpoena issuer to file a petition for contempt of court. “Any person who fails to obey a citation, subpoena, or order or other direction of the court issued pursuant to any provision of this rule may be punished for contempt.” Ill. S.Ct. R. 277(h) Contempt is a big, broad issue in an Illinois divorce court. Illinois divorce courts can weild contempt charges however they want. “The power to punish for contempt is inherent in courts, as necessary for their self-protection and the maintenance of their dignity, and as an essential auxiliary to the administration of the law and public justice. This power has been recognized from earliest times and from the beginning of judicial administration.” Illinois Commerce Commission v. Salamie, 369 NE 2d 235 – Ill: Appellate Court, 1st Dist., 4th Div. 1977 (citations omitted) “The contempt power lies at the core of the administration of a state’s judicial system.” (Judice v. Vail (1977), 430 U.S. 327, 97 S.Ct. 1211, 1217, 51 L.Ed. 376, 384.) The point of contempt is to get the requested documents and move on with the divorce case. “The purpose of civil contempt is to compel compliance with court orders, not to punish. It is to compel the contemnor to act. It is remedial in nature. A civil contempt proceeding is a proper method for testing the correctness of a pretrial discovery order.” Adler v. Greenfield, 990 NE 2d 1219 – Ill: Appellate Court, 1st Dist., 6th Div. 2013 Continued failure to produce documents requested in a subpoena can result in the court ordering that the subpoenaed party be jailed until the documents are turned over. “Supreme Court Rule 277(h) provides that any person who fails to obey an order to deliver up or convey any personal property or its proceeds or value may be committed until the order is obeyed.” Kennedy v. Four Boys Labor Service, Inc., 664 NE 2d 1088 – Ill: Appellate Court, 2nd Dist. 1996 Putting a subpoena receiver in jail is no small feat. They deserve a hearing to explain themselves and their non-compliance before any order for commitment is issued. “No order of body attachment or other civil order for the incarceration or detention of a natural person respondent to answer for a charge of indirect civil contempt shall issue unless the respondent has first had an opportunity, after personal service or abode service of notice as provided in Supreme Court Rule 105, to appear in court to show cause why the respondent should not be held in contempt.” 735 ILCS 5/12-107.5 If the subpoena receiver politely explains that they cannot comply with the subpoena request (probably because they do not have the requested documents), they will not be found in contempt. A “violation was not willful and contumacious…[if]..he or she had a valid excuse for failing to follow the order.” In re Marriage of Knoll, 2016 IL App (1st) 152494, ¶ 50, 65 N.E.3d 878 If the subpoena receiver has the documents, the only defense to not producing those documents is to claim that the documents are privileged communication. “All matters that are privileged against disclosure on the trial, including privileged communications between a party or his agent and the attorney for the party, are privileged against disclosure through any discovery procedure.” Ill. Sup. Ct. R. 201 Privileged information is almost always communication that society agrees should be free from broader inspection so as to encourage honesty and full disclosure between the communicators. Communication with attorneys, doctors, therapists and spiritual advisors is privileged. Refusing to comply with a subpoena’s request just because it is a massive hassle is NOT invoking any kind of privilege. “It is well settled that no privilege can be claimed by the custodian of corporate records, regardless of how small the corporation may be” Bellis v. United States, 417 US 85 – Supreme Court 1974 Even a third-party to the third-party preventing compliance with a subpoena can result in a contempt finding. “[I]t is contempt of court to fire or discipline an employee for attending court when subpoenaed as a witness” Palmateer v. International Harvester Co., 421 NE 2d 876 – Ill: Supreme Court 1981 (citation omitted) When the subpoenaed party is not an Illinois resident, however, it becomes much more difficult to enforce the subpoenas. An Illinois order to detain a third party cannot be enforced in another state unless the Illinois order has been enrolled in that third party’s state and then adjudicated under that state’s rules. This means hiring an attorney licensed in that state to enroll the order and demand enforcement from that state’s courts. Subpoenas are great because they can give you the documents you need now to move your divorce case forward when your spouse will not provide those same or similar documents. But, if a third party has access to documents that are relevant to your divorce and you are having a hard time getting that third party to produce those documents, there is a very good chance that you or your spouse have the right to request those documents independently. It is probably just easier to simply ask the third party for the documents or to have the court order your spouse to ask for the documents in lieu of issuing a subpoena. If your spouse and the subpoenaed party cannot find the documents…they are likely collaborating with each other and should both be held in contempt. Failure to produce documents by a spouse and third-party who can be inferred to be acting in coercion should then result in sanctions which will affect your ultimate trial. “If a party, or any person at the instance of or in collusion with a party, unreasonably fails to comply with any provision of part E of article II of the rules of this court (Discovery, Requests for Admission, and Pretrial Procedure) or fails to comply with any order entered under these rules, the court, on motion, may enter, in addition to remedies elsewhere specifically provided, such orders as are just, including, among others, the following: … That a witness be barred from testifying concerning that issue” Ill. Sup. Ct. R. 219(c)(iv) The non-cooperative spouse will not be allowed to testify as to what he or she is not cooperating with. For example, failure to turn over documents regarding a business will result in that spouse not being allowed to testify regarding that business. This allows the other spouse to say whatever they want about the business without rebuttal. Ex: “This business makes a lot of money. He always told me so.” “[T]estimony is evidence.” People ex rel. Hartigan v. ILL. COMMERCE COM’N, 592 NE 2d 1066 – Ill: Supreme Court 1992 “[J]udges base their findings only on competent evidence.” People v. Todd, 687 NE 2d 998 – Ill: Supreme Court 1997 A non-complying spouse’s enforced silence will result in the court only considering the other spouse’s testimony. Again, the purpose of all discovery sanctions is compliance: disclosure of the truth. Once proper disclosure is made, the sanctions should be lifted. “A just order of sanctions under Rule 219(c) is one which, to the degree possible, insures both discovery and a trial on the merits…When imposing sanctions, the court’s purpose is to coerce compliance with discovery rules and orders, not to punish the dilatory party.” Shimanovsky v. Gen. Motors Corp., 181 Ill. 2d 112, 123 (Ill. 1998) If you are struggling with a spouse who will not tell you the truth and third-parties who are complicit in this obscuration of the facts by not completing responding to subpoenas, you need help. Contact my Chicago family law firm to discuss your case with an experienced Illinois divorce attorney. Via https://rdklegal.com/what-if-my-subpoena-is-not-answered-in-my-illinois-divorce/ |
About UsGetting a divorce can be a stressful and emotional time in a person's life. This is why it's very important to have a skilled and compassionate divorce lawyer who can help guide you during this difficult time. Whether you are looking for help with family law matters, uncontested or contested divorce, child support, or custody, At the Law Office of Russell D. Knight, we help clients navigate divorce proceedings both inside and outside of courtrooms. For a consultation with a Chicago divorce attorney, contact our office today at (773) 334-6311. ArchivesNo Archives Categories |