In re Marriage of Reed, 2023 IL App (1st) 220949-U

Summary

Case Summary: In re Marriage of Reed, 2023 IL App (1st) 220949-U - Digital forensics has become the decisive weapon in high-asset divorce battles, where subpoenaed devices, cryptocurrency traces, and metadata can expose hidden assets that paper trails miss. In re Marriage of Reed (2023) arms Illinois litigators with appellate ammunition to dismantle weak nonmarital classifications and dissipation defenses—proving that opponents who neglect comprehensive digital discovery are handing you the case.

The opposing counsel is already on the back foot—they just don't know it yet. In re Marriage of Reed landed on December 22, 2023, and if you're litigating high-asset divorces in Cook County or the collar counties, this Rule 23 order is your new playbook for exposing sloppy asset classification and half-baked dissipation defenses.

The First District didn't mince words. They reversed and remanded because the trial court's findings on nonmarital property and dissipation couldn't survive scrutiny. Translation: the judge bought arguments that weren't backed by paper. That's a fatal error in complex property litigation—and an opportunity you can exploit if you know how to build the record your opponent neglected.

The Facts That Matter

Sonya Reed appealed the dissolution judgment, challenging three core rulings: the classification of a Chicago Heights property as nonmarital, the trial court's refusal to find dissipation based on substantial cash withdrawals and transfers (including gambling expenditures), and the overall distribution of marital assets—particularly the Matteson homestead equity and checking account allocations.

Vernon Reed's defense rested on minimal documentation: a 2017 trust deed and limited testimony claiming the Chicago Heights property was inherited. The trial court accepted this. The appellate court did not.

Why the Trial Court Lost Control of the Record

Here's where practitioners need to pay attention. The First District found the evidentiary foundation for nonmarital classification was insufficient. A trust deed and oral testimony don't cut it when you're asking a court to exclude real property from the marital estate. The burden of proof for nonmarital classification under Illinois law requires clear and convincing evidence—and that means documentary tracing, not storytelling.

On dissipation, the trial court rejected Sonya's claims largely because it couldn't trace expenditures back to the alleged breakdown period. The court declined to look back to 2015. The appellate panel found this reasoning unsupportable given the record evidence of substantial cash movements, transfers, and gambling activity both during the marriage and after separation.

The takeaway is surgical: if your opponent can't produce the paper trail, their classification argument is vulnerable. If you're defending against dissipation claims, you need contemporaneous documentation showing legitimate marital purpose—not post-hoc rationalizations.

Strategic Leverage Points for Illinois Practitioners

1. Demand Comprehensive Discovery—Then Weaponize the Gaps

Bank records, cancelled checks, wire transfer confirmations, brokerage statements, credit card ledgers. Request them all. When the other side produces incomplete records or claims documents are "unavailable," you've just created your dissipation narrative. The Reed court made clear that substantial cash withdrawals and transfers require explanation. Silence is inference.

And here's where cyber-forensics becomes your force multiplier: deleted financial apps, cryptocurrency wallets, Venmo and Zelle transaction histories, cloud-synced spreadsheets tracking hidden accounts. If your opponent was sloppy with digital hygiene, their phone and laptop become your best witnesses. Subpoena the devices. Image the drives. Let the metadata tell the story they're trying to bury.

2. Pin Down the Breakdown Date Early

The trial court in Reed refused to trace dissipation back to 2015. That temporal limitation shaped the entire outcome—and the appellate court found it problematic. In your cases, establish the breakdown date through contemporaneous evidence: text messages documenting marital discord, separate bedroom arrangements, cessation of joint financial planning, therapy records, statements to family members. Lock this down in discovery and motion practice before trial.

3. Force Explicit Written Findings

The appellate court reversed in part because the trial court's findings lacked sufficient evidentiary support. Protect your record by requesting detailed written findings on every contested asset classification and dissipation claim. If the trial court rules against you without explaining the evidentiary basis, you've preserved a clean appellate issue. If they rule for you with specificity, you've insulated the judgment from reversal.

4. Attack Informal Agreements Aggressively

Oral agreements about property, homestead waivers based on handshake deals, informal understandings about who "really" owns what—these are litigation landmines. Reed reinforces that courts will weigh credibility, but when findings lack documentary support, remand is on the table. If your opponent is relying on informal arrangements, demand the contemporaneous documentation. When it doesn't exist, you've just undermined their entire theory.

The Cyber-Law Intersection Your Opponent Is Ignoring

High-net-worth divorce litigation in 2024 isn't just about bank statements and real estate appraisals. It's about digital asset discovery, cryptocurrency tracing, and forensic analysis of financial applications. The spouse who was "just gambling" may have been moving funds through offshore accounts, purchasing digital assets, or using peer-to-peer payment platforms to obscure transfers.

If your opponent's counsel isn't subpoenaing device data and cloud accounts, they're leaving money on the table—or worse, they're hiding it. Cyber negligence in discovery is leverage. Use it.

Practical Checklist: Building the Record That Survives Appeal


Documentary Tracing: Obtain complete financial records from date of marriage through present. No gaps. No excuses.
Nonmarital Classification: Require clear and convincing evidence—deeds, trust instruments, inheritance documentation, gift letters with contemporaneous dates.
Dissipation Claims: Trace every significant withdrawal to either legitimate marital purpose or dissipation conduct. Create a timeline. Visualize it for the court.
Digital Discovery: Subpoena devices, cloud accounts, financial apps, cryptocurrency exchange records. Image drives. Preserve metadata.
Post-Trial Motions: If findings are vague or unsupported, file targeted motions to preserve appellate issues. Don't wait for the appeal to identify the problem.


The Bottom Line

In re Marriage of Reed is a reminder that trial court victories built on weak foundations don't survive appellate review. If you're prosecuting or defending high-asset divorce claims in Illinois, the record you build in discovery and at trial determines whether your judgment stands or gets sent back for redistribution.

Your opponent may be hoping you won't dig into the bank records, won't trace the cash movements, won't subpoena the devices. That's their mistake. Make them pay for it.

If you're facing a complex property division or dissipation dispute in Cook County or the collar counties, the time to build your case is now—not after the trial court rules against you. Book a strategy consultation and let's discuss how to position your case for the outcome you need.

Full Opinion (PDF): Download the full opinion

Written by Jonathan D. Steele

Chicago divorce attorney with cybersecurity certifications (Security+, CEH, ISC2). Illinois Super Lawyers Rising Star 2016-2025.

Free Consultation

For more insights, read our Divorce Decoded blog.