Background
Kieth and Lisa Ballinger married in 1984. After Kieth filed for dissolution in 2022, Lisa filed a counterpetition seeking maintenance, attorney’s fees, and an equitable share of the marital property. During the proceedings, the circuit court ordered Kieth to pay $3,000 toward Lisa’s interim attorney’s fees.
The circuit court dissolved the marriage, awarded Lisa monthly maintenance of $2,053.17 for 38 years, and divided the marital estate nearly equally, allocating $427,528.23 to Kieth and $430,670.46 to Lisa. The court included Kieth’s regularly received bonuses in his income and calculated Lisa’s income using the higher wages from her prior employment. Kieth appealed the maintenance award, the property division, and the interim fee award.
The Court’s Holding
The appellate court affirmed the maintenance award. It held that Kieth did not establish an abuse of discretion because the circuit court carefully considered the statutory maintenance factors, including the parties’ incomes, Lisa’s inability to maintain the marital standard of living independently, and the length of the marriage. The court also rejected Kieth’s employment-income argument because the circuit court had already used Lisa’s higher prior wages.
The court found Kieth’s challenges to the treatment of his bonuses and the 38-year maintenance term forfeited because he did not support them with relevant legal authority. It noted that Illinois law permits maintenance lasting as long as the marriage, or indefinitely, when a marriage lasted at least 20 years. His challenges to the nearly equal property division and the $3,000 interim attorney’s-fee award were likewise forfeited because he cited only standards of review and supplied no relevant authority establishing reversible error.
Key Takeaways
- A maintenance award will be upheld when the circuit court reasonably considers the applicable statutory factors and the record does not show an abuse of discretion.
- For a marriage lasting at least 20 years, Illinois law permits maintenance for a period equal to the marriage’s duration or for an indefinite term.
- An appellant forfeits an issue by failing to develop a legal argument supported by relevant authority; citing only the standard of review is insufficient.
Why It Matters
The order illustrates the importance of developing each appellate argument with authority that addresses the claimed error. Even potentially reviewable objections to maintenance, property allocation, and attorney’s fees may fail when the appellant provides only factual disagreement or a standard-of-review citation.
The decision also confirms that regularly received bonuses may be included when calculating maintenance where the appellant identifies no authority requiring a percentage-based alternative. The order was issued under Illinois Supreme Court Rule 23 and is nonprecedential except in the limited circumstances permitted by Rule 23(e)(1).