2025 IL App (1st) 221559-U
Ill. App. Ct.2025Background
- Sandy Biangardi filed for dissolution of marriage from Michael Biangardi after a 27-year marriage, during which she was a stay-at-home parent and Michael owned multiple businesses.
- The trial court dissolved the marriage in 2020, awarding Sandy $4,500 in monthly maintenance for two years and ordering a 50/50 split of marital assets, with certain valuations reserved.
- Sandy represented herself at trial after rotating through multiple lawyers and was barred from presenting late-disclosed witnesses and exhibits.
- Michael claimed a significant decline in his income post-2012 due to business losses, and asserted portions of his business and IRA were nonmarital.
- The trial court's final 2022 supplemental judgment gave Sandy specified valuations for her share in Michael's businesses; she appealed, raising numerous issues on maintenance, asset division, and evidentiary rulings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Duration of Maintenance | Sought permanent maintenance due to her homemaker status | Maintenance should be temporary; income not sustainable | Reversed: Ordered permanent maintenance |
| Maintenance Amount | $4,500/month too low; should be higher | Only evidence of income: his pay stubs; $4,500 reasonable | Affirmed: No evidence supporting higher amount |
| Division of Marital Assets (including IRA and property) | Entitled to greater than 50% share and more of IRA | 50/50 division fair given circumstances; IRA mostly nonmarital | Affirmed: 50/50 division and IRA allocation |
| Exclusion of Undisclosed Witnesses/Exhibits | Should have been permitted as a pro se litigant | Proper to exclude for untimely and insufficient disclosure | Affirmed: No abuse of discretion; pro se held to same standard |
| Denial of Posttrial Motions to Reopen Proofs | Needed to address sale of assets and new evidence | No valid excuse for not submitting evidence at trial | Affirmed: No abuse of discretion in denying reopening |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Marriage of Schneider, 214 Ill. 2d 152 (Ill. 2005) (sets standard for abuse of discretion in maintenance awards)
- In re Marriage of Kerber, 215 Ill. App. 3d 248 (Ill. App. Ct. 1991) (permanent maintenance required where spouse sacrificed career)
- In re Marriage of Drury, 317 Ill. App. 3d 201 (Ill. App. Ct. 2000) (abuse of discretion to terminate maintenance for long-term homemaker spouse)
- In re Marriage of Olson, 223 Ill. App. 3d 636 (Ill. App. Ct. 1992) (abuse of discretion standard for allocation of marital estate)
- Sullivan v. Edward Hospital, 209 Ill. 2d 100 (Ill. 2004) (strict compliance required for expert witness disclosures under Rule 213)