In re Marriage of Hyman

Published: 12/8/2025 • 13 min read
By Jonathan D. Steele
In re Marriage of Hyman

Summary

Case Summary: In re Marriage of Hyman - A single word—"shall" versus "may"—in Illinois divorce law transformed one woman's fee recovery from $10,000 to potentially $81,000, exposing how misunderstanding mandatory sanction provisions costs divorcing spouses tens of thousands in rightful recoveries. The Hyman appellate ruling demolishes five pervasive myths about post-judgment enforcement, from the false belief that fee awards are discretionary to the costly assumption that 9% statutory interest requires a specific court order, revealing that delay tactics, hidden assets, and noncompliance can actually become financial leverage for the compliant spouse who knows the law.

5 Dangerous Myths About Post-Judgment Enforcement That Could Cost You EverythingI've seen three clients this month lose tens of thousands of dollars because they believed myths about enforcing divorce judgments in Illinois. When the Second District Appellate Court handed down In re Marriage of Hyman, 2024 IL App (2d) 230352, on December 24, 2024, it didn't just vindicate one spouse—it exposed the dangerous misconceptions that cost people their rightful recoveries every single day.Rachel Hyman's ex-husband hid stock options, dragged out compliance for years, and thought he'd escape with minimal consequences. The trial court initially agreed, awarding Rachel a fraction of her fees. But the appellate court didn't just reverse—it vacated that decision and sent a thundering message to every Illinois courtroom.Here's what you need to know before these myths destroy your case.---

Myth #1: "Attorney Fee Awards Are Always Up to the Judge's Discretion"

Why People Believe It: This myth persists because most fee provisions in Illinois law are discretionary. Attorneys who don't specialize in family law enforcement often assume Section 508(b) works like every other fee statute. The confusion runs deep—even experienced litigators sometimes conflate discretionary fee-shifting with mandatory sanctions. Movies and TV courtroom dramas reinforce the idea that judges wield unlimited power to decide fee amounts based on gut feelings. Even some family law practitioners who handle dozens of cases annually operate under this outdated assumption, potentially costing their clients significant recoveries.

The Reality: Section 508(b) of the Illinois Marriage and Dissolution of Marriage Act uses the word "shall"—not "may." That single word transforms the entire analysis. When your ex fails to comply with court orders without compelling cause or justification, fees aren't awarded at the court's whim. They're mandatory.

🔒 Security Note: Protecting sensitive family information is critical. Learn how SteeleFortress helps law firms and families safeguard their digital assets.

The Hyman appellate court was surgical in its language: the trial court "incorrectly used discretion" when it arbitrarily capped Rachel's fee award at $10,000. She had documented $56,755 in actual fees—every hour logged, every task itemized, every expense verified. The court couldn't just invent a number that felt reasonable.

What This Costs You: Imagine you've spent $80,000 enforcing your ex's compliance with a property division order over eighteen grueling months. Under the myth, you accept a $15,000 fee award and walk away defeated, absorbing a $65,000 loss that compounds your post-divorce financial strain. Under the reality established in Hyman, that $65,000 gap is appealable error—a mathematical certainty, not a judgment call. Rachel's potential recovery jumped from $10,000 to over $81,000 in fees alone—a $71,000 difference that the myth would have stolen from her. That's not judicial discretion. That's the law working as written.

---

Myth #2: "Post-Judgment Interest Is Optional or Requires a Specific Court Order"

Why People Believe It: Many attorneys—and nearly all self-represented litigants navigating the system without guidance—don't realize that interest accrues automatically under Illinois law from the moment a judgment is entered. They assume they need to request it specifically in their pleadings, or that judges decide whether to impose it based on equitable considerations. Some believe interest only applies to commercial judgments between businesses, not family law matters involving spouses. This misconception costs Illinois families millions of dollars annually in unclaimed statutory interest.

The Reality: Under 735 ILCS 5/2-1303, money judgments accrue interest at 9% per annum from the date of entry. This isn't optional. It's not discretionary. It's automatic—as automatic as the calendar turning from one day to the next. The Hyman trial court tried to deny Rachel post-judgment interest on her $130,196 judgment, treating it as something she needed to earn rather than something she was owed by operation of law. The appellate court called this "erroneous" and directed interest dating back to February 2, 2022—nearly three years of compounding value.

What This Costs You: Let's run Rachel's actual numbers with precision:

That's $33,200 the trial court tried to deny her through sheer legal error—money that was hers by statute from day one. For higher-value judgments common in DuPage, Lake, and Cook County divorces, the stakes compound dramatically:

| Original Judgment | 9% Interest (3 Years) | Total Recovery ||-------------------|----------------------|----------------|| $500,000 | $135,000 | $635,000 || $1,000,000 | $270,000 | $1,270,000 || $2,500,000 | $675,000 | $3,175,000 |

Your ex's delay tactics—every continuance, every missed deadline, every strategic stall—just became your profit center. But only if you know to claim what's already yours.

---

Myth #3: "You Need to Prove You Can't Afford Your Own Attorney to Get Fee Awards"

Why People Believe It: This myth comes from confusing two fundamentally different fee provisions that serve entirely different purposes. Section 508(a) does require showing inability to pay—it's designed to level the playing field between spouses with unequal resources during initial divorce proceedings. People hear about 508(a) requirements at networking events, in online forums, or from friends who went through divorce, and they assume those requirements apply universally to all fee requests. Bad legal advice from non-specialists who handle family law as a sideline perpetuates this confusion across Illinois courtrooms.

The Reality: Section 508(b) operates on completely different grounds with a completely different purpose. It's a sanction provision, not an equalization provision. The legislature designed it to punish noncompliance, not to help impoverished spouses. You don't need to prove financial hardship. You don't need to open your bank statements. You need to prove three things:

  1. Your ex failed to comply with court orders
  2. They had no compelling cause or justification for noncompliance
  3. You incurred reasonable fees addressing their noncompliance

That's it. Three elements. Rachel Hyman never had to prove she couldn't afford her attorneys or that paying them would cause hardship. She proved Jeffrey didn't comply and had no excuse. The fees followed automatically—mandated by statute, not granted by judicial grace.

What This Costs You: Picture this scenario playing out in a Kane County courtroom: Your ex earns $400,000 annually as a corporate executive. You earn $350,000 as a physician. Under the myth, you don't even file for fees because you assume your comfortable income disqualifies you from any recovery. Under the reality, your ex's willful noncompliance—hiding assets in brokerage accounts, ignoring discovery orders for months, defying court directives with impunity—triggers mandatory sanctions regardless of your financial comfort. One client I've seen lost $45,000 in recoverable fees because they believed this myth and never filed the petition. That's $45,000 left on the courthouse steps.

---

Myth #4: "If the Trial Court Reduces Your Fee Award, You Just Have to Accept It"

Why People Believe It: Appeals are expensive—often $15,000 to $40,000 in additional attorney fees for family law matters. Appeals are time-consuming—typically twelve to eighteen months from notice of appeal to final decision. Most people assume trial court decisions on "minor" matters like fee amounts aren't worth challenging when they've already spent years in litigation. They've been told by well-meaning advisors that appellate courts give trial judges wide latitude on fee determinations, treating them as findings of fact rather than applications of law. They're exhausted from years of litigation and just want closure at any cost.

The Reality: When a trial court reduces mandatory fee awards without explanation, that's reversible error—not a close call, not a matter of interpretation, but clear legal mistake. The Hyman court made this crystal clear in language that leaves no room for ambiguity: the trial court's $10,000 award came "without explanation" when Rachel had documented $56,755 in actual fees with detailed billing records. The appellate court didn't just disagree with the amount—it vacated the award entirely and sent it back for proper determination under the correct legal standard.

Supporting precedent reinforces this principle across Illinois appellate districts:

What This Costs You: Rachel's trial court tried to shortchange her by $46,755 in trial-level fees alone—fees she actually incurred, actually paid, and actually documented. Add the $24,833.91 in appellate defense fees the trial court denied entirely without analysis, and she was looking at a $71,588.91 gap between what she was owed and what she was awarded. The appeal recovered that money. Accepting the myth would have cost her nearly three times what she initially received—and would have rewarded her ex-husband's years of obstruction.

---

Myth #5: "Hidden Assets Are Too Hard to Find and Too Expensive to Pursue"

Why People Believe It: Forensic accountants charge $15,000-$50,000 for high-asset investigations depending on complexity and document volume. Digital forensics adds another layer of expense—often $5,000-$20,000 for comprehensive device analysis. People assume their ex is "too smart" to leave a trail, having worked with sophisticated financial advisors for years. They've heard that offshore accounts in the Caymans and cryptocurrency held in cold wallets are untraceable by anyone short of federal investigators. They've heard horror stories about spending $100,000 to find $50,000 in hidden assets—a net loss that adds insult to injury.

The Reality: Jeffrey Hyman hid stock options—a sophisticated form of compensation that doesn't appear on standard W-2s or bank statements. Rachel found them through methodical investigation. She recovered $130,196 from that single category of undisclosed assets—after taxes, after fees, after everything. The forensic discovery that located those options cost a fraction of the recovery. And here's what the myth obscures completely: when you find hidden assets and your ex has no justification for concealment, you recover your discovery costs through mandatory 508(b) fees. The investigation pays for itself.

Modern enforcement strategies make discovery more effective than ever before: