In re Marriage of Benjamin
2017 IL App (1st) 161862
| Ill. App. Ct. | 2017Background
- Laurence and Arlene Benjamin divorced in 2001; their settlement required maintenance payments.
- In 2006 Arlene filed for indirect civil contempt for Laurence’s missed maintenance; mediation followed.
- In January 2009 the parties entered an Agreed Judgment: Laurence paid $350,000 immediately (check + securities) and promised $150,000 due December 1, 2013.
- Laurence failed to pay the $150,000; in December 2013 he filed a 735 ILCS 5/2-1401 petition seeking to vacate the Agreed Judgment, alleging Arlene concealed substantial assets (a Chase account) and that he relied on her disclosures.
- After discovery and a multi-day evidentiary hearing the trial court denied the 2-1401 petition, later found Laurence in indirect civil contempt (purgeable by payment), awarded Arlene attorney fees, and denied Laurence’s motion for sanctions for a purportedly false affidavit.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court erred in denying Laurence’s 2-1401 petition (fraudulent concealment of assets) | Laurence: Arlene concealed a Chase account and misrepresented assets; he relied on those misstatements when entering the Agreed Judgment | Arlene: Funds were loans from her son (supported by affidavit/notes); Laurence (through counsel) had Chase records and mediation disclosures showing loans and account existence; he failed to exercise diligence | Affirmed — trial court found no fraudulent concealment; record showed Laurence (or his counsel) had Chase records pre-2009 and failed to exercise due diligence; credibility findings supported denial |
| Whether contempt finding was erroneous because Laurence acted in good faith | Laurence: He did not willfully disobey; acted in good faith | Arlene: He breached the Agreed Judgment by not paying $150,000 due 12/1/2013 | Not reviewed as merits — moot because Laurence paid the required amount and the contempt was purged |
| Whether attorney fees awarded to Arlene were unreasonable or improper | Laurence: Fees improper because he prevailed on merits of underlying dispute / or fees excessive | Arlene: She substantially prevailed in defeating the 2-1401 petition and incurred reasonable fees over multi-year litigation | Affirmed — court did not abuse discretion; Arlene substantially prevailed and fees were found reasonable by trial judge familiar with the case |
| Whether trial court erred by denying sanctions for allegedly false affidavit filed by Arlene in support of summary judgment | Laurence: Arlene’s affidavit contained false statements and warranted sanctions/striking | Arlene: No intent to deceive; affidavit used recollected materials after files were destroyed; petitioner suffered no prejudice when summary judgment was denied | Affirmed — no abuse of discretion; trial court found no intent to deceive and petitioner suffered no prejudice |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Haynes, 192 Ill. 2d 437 (explain statutory purpose of 2-1401 relief)
- In re Marriage of Himmel, 285 Ill. App. 3d 145 (party not relieved for lack of diligence in discovering facts before judgment)
- In re Marriage of Buck, 318 Ill. App. 3d 489 (fraudulent concealment tolling for 2-1401; procedural posture distinctions)
- Uptown Federal Savings & Loan Ass’n v. Kotsiopoulos, 105 Ill. App. 3d 444 (manifest weight review after evidentiary hearing)
- Snelson v. Kamm, 204 Ill. 2d 1 (deference to trial court credibility findings)
- Turner v. Nama, 294 Ill. App. 3d 19 (no relief where party could have discovered misconduct with ordinary diligence)
- Yugoslav-Am. Cultural Ctr., Inc. v. Parkway Bank & Trust Co., 289 Ill. App. 3d 728 (imputation of attorney knowledge to client)
- Cyclonaire Corp. v. ISG Riverdale, Inc., 378 Ill. App. 3d 554 (trial court superior in judging witness credibility)
- In re Marriage of Haken, 394 Ill. App. 3d 155 (standard of review for fee awards under 5/508)
- In re Marriage of Cotton, 103 Ill. 2d 346 (consideration of which party precipitated litigation in fee awards)
- In re Estate of Wellman, 174 Ill. 2d 335 (mootness where no real controversy remains)
- In re Marriage of Betts, 155 Ill. App. 3d 85 (payment of past-due obligation renders contempt challenge moot)
- Chicago Title & Trust Co. v. Anderson, 177 Ill. App. 3d 615 (abuse of discretion standard for sanctions)