Gitlin Law Firm 2008 Illinois Divorce and Paternity Case and ...

50% of Net Marital Estate
st
th
IRMO Polsky, (1 District, 4 Div., Corrected December 18, 2008)
The ex-husband argued on appeal that the trial court erred by awarding his wife $183 million,
which represented an equal share of the marital estate, following the parties' 30-year marriage.
As is the theme in the other 2008 cases discussed below, he urged that the trial court's award
ignored the "overwhelmingly disproportionate" contribution he made to the value of
the estate. The husband contended that the massive marital estate exists solely because of his
efforts in acquiring three companies. The appellate court rejected the husband’s arguments
which were in essence that his wife would receive a windfall and that the trial court should have
emphasized the contribution factor. The appellate court stated:
Thus, under section 503(d), a spouse's financial contribution to the acquisition of
marital property is only one of several factors the trial court considers when
fashioning an equitable distribution of marital assets. In re Marriage of Johns,
311 Ill. App. 3d 699, 704 (2000). In In re Marriage of Heroy, No. 1-07-0308,
slip op. at 32 (September 17, 2008), this court recently has held that "[a]lthough a
party's greater financial contribution may support a disproportionate property
award in favor of the contributing spouse (see, e.g., In re Marriage of Jones, 187
Ill. App. 3d 206 (1989); In re Marriage of Guntren, 141 Ill. App. 3d 1 (1986)), 'a
spouse's greater financial contributions do not necessarily entitle him or her to a
greater share of the marital assets' (In re Marriage of Scoville, 233 Ill. App. 3d
746, 758 (1992)). Indeed, '[i]n a long-term marriage, the source of the assets in
acquiring marital property becomes less of a factor, and a spouse's role as
homemaker becomes greater.' Scoville, 233 Ill. App. 3d at 758." Each case rests
on its own facts. In re Marriage of Cecil, 202 Ill. App. 3d 783, 790 (1990).
The appellate court noted the similarity of the case with Heroy. The court then commented that
the appellate court’s review of a trial court’s decision such as this is “extremely deferential.”
Heroy - 55% plus Substantial Maintenance Award Permissible When Significant Non-
Marital Estate and Long-Term Marriage / Effect of Substantial Nonmarital Property Even
Where Permanent Maintenance Award
st
IRMO Heroy, (1 Dist., September 17, 2008)
Where the wife’s non-marital estate was valued at $154,000 while the husband’s non-marital
estate was valued at $4,041,000, it was permissible to award the wife 55% of the $8.7 million
marital estate in addition to a generous maintenance award. The appellate court stated in
pertinent part:
Although a party’s greater financial contribution may support a disproportionate
property award in favor of the contributing spouse (see, e.g., In re Marriage of
Jones, 187 Ill. App. 3d 206 (1989); IRMO Guntren, 141 Ill. App. 3d 1 (1986)), “a
spouse’s greater financial contributions do not necessarily entitle him or her to a
greater share of the marital assets” (IRMO Scoville, 233 Ill. App. 3d 746, 758
(1992)). Indeed, “[i]n a long-term marriage, the source of the assets in acquiring
marital property becomes less of a factor, and a spouse’s role as homemaker
becomes greater.” Scoville, 233 Ill. App. 3d at 758.
The Gitlin Law Firm, P.C. Page 10 of 55 www.gitlinlawfirm.com