In re Marriage of Ballinger

In this dissolution of marriage appeal from Shelby County, Husband challenged the circuit court's maintenance award, property division, and interim attorney's fee order. The circuit court had awarded Wife maintenance of $2,053.17 per month for 38 years, divided the marital estate nearly equally (with Wife receiving slightly more), and required Husband to pay $3,000 in interim attorney's fees, with each party otherwise bearing their own fees.

The Fifth District affirmed across the board, but largely on procedural grounds rather than reaching the substantive merits. Husband's arguments regarding treatment of his bonus income, the 38-year maintenance duration, and the property division all failed because he cited no legal authority beyond boilerplate standard-of-review citations, resulting in forfeiture under Illinois Supreme Court Rule 341(h)(7). The court noted that the case Husband relied on for a percentage-based bonus approach, In re Marriage of Micheli, actually supported the opposite result. On duration, the court observed that section 504(b-1)(1)(B) of the Illinois Marriage and Dissolution of Marriage Act expressly permits maintenance terms equal to the length of marriages of 20+ years, or indefinite terms, undercutting Husband's claim. The court also rejected Husband's employment-based argument because the circuit court had already used Wife's higher prior salary in its calculation. On the merits of the overall maintenance award, the court found the circuit court adequately considered all fourteen statutory factors under section 504(a) and did not abuse its discretion.

For practitioners, this decision serves as a cautionary reminder that appellate arguments unsupported by substantive legal authority—even if factually plausible—will be forfeited, and reinforces the broad discretion trial courts have in long-term marriage maintenance determinations.