Publications
Be Careful Who You Talk To
Published in Chicago Lawyer Magazine, July 2013
By Daniel R. Stefani
The Illinois Appellate Court First District recently issued a Supreme Court Rule 23 Order affirming a decision by the Honorable William S. Boyd in the Circuit Court of Cook County. The case centered around whether an attorney-client relationship was established which prohibited an attorney from communicating with the opposing spouse during a divorce while that opposing spouse was represented by counsel. It also centered on whether the attorney represented the litigant or was merely acting as a “third-party neutral” as defined by Rule 2.4(a) of the Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct of 2010. This case, while having limited precedential value, reminds us all as attorneys that we must never lose sight of our ethical obligations even when presumably attempting to do a favor for our friends or family.
Read More
Disgorgement of Attorney Fees
Published in Chicago Lawyer Magazine, November 2012
By Daniel R. Stefani
The Illinois Marriage and Dissolution of Marriage Act (“IMDMA”) allows for one party to petition the court to order another party to pay their attorneys’ fees during the pendency of a case. If the court finds that both parties lack the financial ability to pay their own attorneys’ fees, the court shall enter an order that allocates available funds for each party’s counsel in a manner that achieves substantial parity between the parties. Available funds include “retainers or interim payments, or both, previously paid”. In such a situation, an attorney for one party may be required to disgorge “retainers, interim payments or both” pursuant to the statute. The Court’s ability to reach into attorneys’ client trust accounts and/or operating accounts to achieve such disgorgement is an issue that the Appellate Court has had to deal with on two occasions in 2012.
Read More
Compelling Payment of College Expenses
Published in Chicago Lawyer Magazine, May 2012
By Daniel Stefani
Ever since I was a young practitioner, I have struggled with Section 513 of the Illinois Marriage and Dissolution of Marriage Act (“IMDMA”) which allows a divorced parent to compel the other to contribute to their child’s post-high school educational expenses.
Read More
Substitution of Judge for Cause
Published in Chicago Lawyer Magazine, December 2011/January 2012
By Daniel R. Stefani
Since the Illinois Marriage and Dissolution of Marriage Act specifically states that there shall be no trial by jury, the issue of substitution of judges is of particular importance to our area of law. On August 24, 2011, the Supreme Court of Illinois rendered the opinion in In Re Marriage of O’Brien, 2011 WL 3359713 (Ill.). The opinion has not yet been released for publication in the permanent law reports and is therefore subject to revision or withdrawal. The majority held only that the actual prejudice standard applies to a petition seeking a substitution of judge for cause. Justice Garman filed a specially concurring opinion and Justice Karmeier and Justice Kilbride also filed a specially concurring opinion which agreed with affirming the Appellate Court but disagreed with the applicable standard to be applied by the Court.
Read More
Setting of a Support Obligation
Published in Chicago Lawyer Magazine, June 2011
By Daniel R. Stefani
Over the last few years, I have seen a higher frequency of divorce cases where the family’s historic breadwinner is unemployed — some by choice, but others who were victims of the economic downturn. The lucky ones received a severance package. The unlucky ones are forced to live off their assets until a new employment opportunity comes their way.
Read More
Noteworthy Changes For The New Year
Published in Chicago Lawyer Magazine, February 2011
By Daniel Stefani
On Sept. 27, the Illinois Supreme Court announced its adoption of the Illinois Rules of Evidence effective Jan. 2011. These rules codify the evidentiary rules that Illinois courts followed historically based on case law, statutes, Illinois Supreme Court Rules and Local Rules.
Read More
Implications of Bifurcated Dissolution of Marriage Proceedings
Published in Chicago Lawyer Magazine, September 2010
By Daniel Stefani
In certain situations where there is a pending petition for dissolution of marriage, the parties can agree or in certain rare situations, the Court may grant a motion of either party to bifurcate their dissolution of marriage proceedings. This means that the Court enters an order immediately dissolving the bonds of the parties’ marriage but reserving adjudication of the remaining issues such as the division of marital assets and debts, maintenance, child support, custody and attorneys’ fees to a later date.
Read More
New Amendments to Fee Statute
Published in Chicago Lawyer Magazine, May 2010
By Daniel R. Stefani
On August 18, 2009, Governor Quinn signed into law certain amendments to the Illinois Marriage and Dissolution of Marriage Act (“Act”) relating to payment of attorney fees and other litigation costs incurred during actions brought pursuant to the Act. There were primarily six important amendments to the Act.
Read More
Modifiability of Spousal Support
Published in Chicago Lawyer Magazine, January 2010
By Daniel Stefani
Spousal support, which is known in Illinois as maintenance, is an ever-changing area in the divorce world.
On October 8, 2009, the Illinois Supreme court issued its opinion on Steven Blum v. Judy Kostner, (2009 WL 3212542 Ill.). Although the prevailing opinion of divorce attorneys and judges was consistent with Blum, there was no definitive direction from the statute or case law until now. After I read the case, I wondered whether it will create more or less litigation.
Read More
Collecting Support and Arrearages
Published in Chicago Lawyer Magazine, September 2009
By Daniel Stefani
With today’s tough economic climate, the challenge of collecting child support and maintenance arrearages is becoming increasingly difficult. Many delinquent payors are out of work and have little to no cash, liquid assets or equity in their home. Oftentimes, the only asset in the delinquent payor’s control is their 401(k) or individual retirement account.
Read More