In re Marriage of Mercier

Published: 9/7/2025
By Jonathan D. Steele
In re Marriage of Mercier

Summary

Case Summary: In re Marriage of Mercier - The critical vulnerability at the heart of Mercier is the post‑judgment enforcement gap—pensions that cease despite a filed QILDRO and unpreserved ESI—which enables gamesmanship and exposes the noncompliant party to sanctions under 750 ILCS 5/508(b). The strategic remedy is immediate and forensic: issue litigation holds, secure timestamped plan confirmations, subpoena pension disbursement logs and system records, and, where necessary, retain digital forensics to build a chronology that sustains fee petitions, preserves objections, and leverages Mercier’s holding that courts may award fees on the existing record without a separate evidentiary hearing.

When a Pension Isn’t Paid and the Clock Keeps Ticking: In re Marriage of Mercier (2025)

Imagine you’re standing in a Cook County courtroom. Your client’s QILDRO is on file, the pension administrator has been served, and yet, month after month, the beneficiary check doesn’t arrive. Opposing counsel files paper after paper, missives pile up in email, and the opposing party alternately ignores filings and springs new, last-minute theories about “undisclosed assets.” That is the factual heartbeat of In re Marriage of Mercier — and it should feel urgent to every family lawyer handling post-judgment enforcement.

Key Facts

Case: In re Marriage of Mercier, 2025 IL App (1st) 241075 (Case No. 1-24-1075), decided June 30, 2025.

Core timeline: Divorce entered Sept. 19, 2019; MSA awarded Ljiljana Mercier’s pension to her until Jan. 1, 2022; thereafter Mark Mercier entitled to 50% of payments per QILDRO entered Jan. 3, 2022. Mark filed enforcement motions June 7, 2022, after missed payments; litigation ensued with defaults, dismissed transfer attempts, repeated noncompliance, and a fee petition. The trial court sanctioned Ljiljana $25,000 under 750 ILCS 5/508(b); the Appellate Court affirmed.

Main Legal Question

Did the trial court abuse its discretion by awarding attorney fees under section 508(b) of the Illinois Marriage and Dissolution of Marriage Act (750 ILCS 5/508(b)) without a formal evidentiary hearing on the fee petition?

Court’s Reasoning (Condensed)

The Appellate Court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion. The record showed a pattern of dilatory conduct by Ljiljana — missed deadlines, unproductive maneuvers (like attempted venue transfers), and repeated failure to comply with clear court directives. The court emphasized that fee awards under 750 ILCS 5/508(b) are discretionary and may be supported by the trial court’s factual findings and court file. Ljiljana’s arguments that she was justified, or that the fee award required a separate evidentiary hearing, were rejected as either unfounded or forfeited for lack of timely preservation.

Why This Matters — Beyond the Paperwork

This is not just a fees case. It signals a hard line against gamesmanship that prolongs enforcement. For family law practitioners, the decision is a reminder: courts have broad authority to sanction obstructive behavior, and they will scrutinize the litigation record — including electronic communications, filings, and timelines — when deciding whether conduct “prolonged the litigation unnecessarily.”

Concrete Lessons for Attorneys and Firms — Actionable, Step-by-Step

  1. Preserve Everything Immediately (Litigation Hold)

    Step 1: Issue a written litigation hold to your client the moment a post-judgment enforcement matter arises. Step 2: Identify custodians (client, ex, financial officers, administrators). Step 3: Freeze relevant electronic accounts (email, payroll portals, pension admin logins) and document preservation steps in an engagement letter. Timeframe: within 24–48 hours. Cost: often $0–$500 internal; forensic hold services $1,000+ if needed.

  2. Serve and Confirm QILDRO/Supplemental Orders with Timestamped Proof

    Step 1: Serve the QILDRO on the pension plan via certified mail and plan-required channels. Step 2: Obtain written confirmation from the plan administrator (email + authenticated portal screenshots). Step 3: Archive confirmations in a secure case folder with MD5/SHA-1 hashes if possible. Rationale: courts will want proof that enforcement mechanisms were deployed correctly.

  3. Use Digital Forensics When Payments Stop Without Explanation

    Step 1: If the client reports non-payment, quickly subpoena pension disbursement records for the relevant time window. Step 2: Retain a neutral digital forensics vendor to capture system logs and payment records (costs typically $2,000–$7,500 depending on scope). Step 3: Use forensics evidence as an exhibit to fee petitions to show delay caused by opponent’s noncompliance.

  4. Document Every Attempt to Communicate and Comply

    Step 1: Use a central case management system to log phone calls, emails, certified mail receipts, hearing dates, and draft orders. Step 2: Generate a chronological enforcement timeline as an exhibit to any fee petition. Courts rely on chronology — Mercier turned on cumulative delay.

  5. Protect Privileged Communications (MFA, Encryption)

    Step 1: Require clients to use multi-factor authentication (MFA) on all accounts that touch financial instruments. Step 2: Encrypt file storage and transmit privileged materials via secure portals (cost: many portals <$50/month). This reduces risk that opposing counsel will claim “undisclosed assets” based on hacked or leaked data.

  6. Anticipate and Preempt Transfer/Venue Games

    Step 1: Immediately object in writing to improper venue or transfer motions and attach the MSA/QILDRO and service history. Step 2: Request expedited consideration when repeated transfer attempts are a stalling tactic.

Human Element: Why Cybersecurity and Client Behavior Intersect with Sanctions

Mercier is a cautionary tale about human choices: a party who ignores court orders, misses deadlines, or introduces surprise claims increases the odds of sanctions. But the digital age magnifies this risk. Clients who manage pensions via online portals, communicate by text, or handle transfers through fintech apps can inadvertently create gaps in the record — gaps that courts interpret as evasiveness. Your job as counsel is to reduce opportunities for ambiguity by locking down ESI, documenting every step, and coaching clients on compliant behavior.

How Mercier Will Shape Future Disputes

Immediate Checklist for Practitioners (Use Today)

Statutory Anchor: 750 ILCS 5/508(b) authorizes the court to award attorney fees and costs when a party’s conduct necessitates litigation to secure compliance; Mercier underscores that award’s practical teeth.

The message from Mercier is blunt: courts will not tolerate deliberate delay, and they expect modern lawyers to treat digital evidence and preservation as central to enforcement. Take the few decisive steps above now — document, preserve, encrypt, and litigate smart — or risk your client paying the price.

Call to action: If you’re facing post-judgment noncompliance or need a QILDRO enforcement plan that includes ESI preservation and forensic protocols, contact our team for a triage checklist and vendor referrals. Don’t wait until another missed payment becomes another fee award.

References

Full Opinion (PDF): Download the full opinion

For more insights, read our Divorce Decoded blog.