In re Marriage of Springer, 2025 IL App (5th) 220378-U

Summary

Case Summary: In re Marriage of Springer, 2025 IL App (5th) 220378-U - In re Marriage of Springer reinforces that Illinois appellate courts will not disturb trial-level findings on child support, dissipation, or asset classification absent a properly developed evidentiary record—making forensic documentation and asset tracing at trial dispositive rather than optional. The reversal of the contempt orders on procedural due process grounds underscores that even meritorious enforcement actions fail when petitions for rule to show cause lack proper specificity and notice.

The opposing counsel is already on the back foot. When In re Marriage of Springer landed on my desk, I saw exactly what I expected: a respondent who thought he could waltz into an Illinois appellate court and rewrite history. The Fifth District wasn't having it. This case is a masterclass in what happens when you fail to build your evidentiary record, when you commingle assets like an amateur, and when your contempt defense crumbles under procedural scrutiny.

Let me break down what this unpublished opinion means for your high-stakes divorce—and why your opposition should be very, very nervous.

The Springer Battlefield: What Was Actually at Stake

Brett Alan Springer appealed from the Vermilion County circuit court, throwing everything at the wall: child support calculations, dissipation claims, asset classification, evidentiary rulings, and contempt judgments. Judge Derek J. Girton's decisions were largely upheld, with one critical exception—the contempt orders got reversed on procedural grounds.

Here's what the appellate court actually decided:


Child support calculation: Affirmed. The trial court's numbers stood because respondent couldn't produce adequate evidence to challenge them.
Dissipation claims on joint checking account: Affirmed. No offset awarded because petitioner failed to prove dissipation with proper tracing.
Mutual fund and annuity classification as marital property: Affirmed. Commingling and title changes converted what respondent claimed were nonmarital assets.
Evidentiary rulings on annuity testimony: Affirmed. No abuse of discretion found.
Contempt judgments: Reversed and remanded. Procedural defects in the petitions for rule to show cause violated due process.


The judge already knows what happens when you show up unprepared. The Fifth District just reminded everyone else.

Child Support: Your Income Evidence Is Your Ammunition

Respondent challenged the permanent child support calculation. He lost. Why? Because appellate courts in Illinois give tremendous deference to trial court findings on income and support calculations. If you want to upset those numbers on appeal, you need an ironclad evidentiary record built at the trial level.

Springer didn't have it.

Strategic takeaway: Your financial discovery must be surgical. Bank statements, tax returns, business valuations, forensic accountant testimony—these aren't optional. They're mandatory. If you're the payor spouse trying to reduce support, your documentation needs to be bulletproof before you ever reach the courtroom. If you're the recipient spouse, you better have a forensic expert ready to expose every hidden income stream.

I've seen too many high-net-worth clients assume their accountant's spreadsheet will carry the day. It won't. The trial court's findings will stand unless you give the appellate court a compelling reason to intervene. Springer didn't. Don't make his mistake.

Dissipation: Trace It or Lose It

Here's where petitioner's claim died: she alleged respondent dissipated funds from the joint checking account, but she couldn't prove it. The appellate court upheld the trial court's refusal to award an offset because there was no sufficient tracing, no compelling evidence of dissipation.

Under Illinois law, dissipation claims require proof that marital assets were used for purposes unrelated to the marriage at a time when the marriage was undergoing an irreconcilable breakdown. That means you need:


Clear documentation of the transfers
Timing evidence showing the marriage was already breaking down
Proof of intent—that the spending wasn't for legitimate marital purposes


Strategic takeaway: If you're alleging dissipation, you need a forensic trail that would make a federal prosecutor jealous. Bank records, credit card statements, receipts, testimony about the timeline of marital breakdown—all of it. Vague accusations don't survive judicial scrutiny.

And if you're defending against a dissipation claim? Document everything. Every legitimate expense, every marital purpose, every business justification. Your opposition wants to paint you as a spendthrift. Make them prove it.

Commingling: The Silent Wealth Killer

This is where Springer got demolished. He argued that an AIVSX mutual fund and a Nationwide annuity were nonmarital property. The trial court disagreed. The appellate court affirmed.

Why? Because title changes and commingling during the marriage converted those accounts into marital property—or at minimum created a marital interest that the trial court properly recognized.

Let me be direct: the moment you add your spouse's name to a premarital account, you've created a presumption of gift. The moment you deposit marital funds into a nonmarital account, you've begun the commingling process that can transmute the entire asset. Illinois courts have consistently held that such actions can convert nonmarital property into marital property.

Springer tried to argue the annuity retained its nonmarital character. The trial court excluded testimony on that point, and the appellate court found no abuse of discretion. The evidentiary record simply didn't support his position.

Strategic takeaway: If you have significant premarital assets—investment accounts, retirement funds, real estate, business interests—keep them segregated. Do not add your spouse to the title. Do not deposit marital income into those accounts. Do not use marital funds to pay expenses related to those assets without meticulous documentation.

This is where my cross-practice expertise becomes critical. In high-net-worth divorces, I routinely coordinate with forensic accountants and digital asset specialists to trace the origin and movement of funds. Cryptocurrency, brokerage accounts, offshore holdings—the same commingling principles apply. If you've been sloppy with your digital assets, your spouse's attorney will find it. I certainly would.

Contempt: Procedure Is Your Shield

The one area where respondent won: the contempt judgments were reversed and remanded. The petitions for rule to show cause were procedurally defective. Due process matters, even when you're the alleged contemnor.

This is a critical reminder that contempt proceedings require strict adherence to procedural requirements. A petition for rule to show cause must provide proper notice and satisfy due process standards. When those requirements aren't met, even valid underlying claims can be vacated.

Strategic takeaway: If you're pursuing contempt against a non-compliant spouse, your petitions must be airtight. Specify the exact order allegedly violated, the specific conduct constituting the violation, and provide adequate notice. Sloppy pleading gives your opponent an escape hatch.

If you're defending against contempt, scrutinize every petition. Procedural defects are leverage. Springer's attorney found them. Yours should too.

The Cyber-Law Intersection: Digital Evidence in Modern Divorce

While Springer doesn't explicitly address digital evidence, the case's emphasis on documentation and tracing has direct implications for tech-savvy divorce litigation. Consider:


Electronic banking records: The dissipation and commingling issues in Springer turned on financial documentation. In modern practice, that means electronic records, metadata, and digital forensics.
Cryptocurrency and digital assets: The same commingling principles that converted Springer's mutual fund and annuity into marital property apply to Bitcoin, Ethereum, NFTs, and other digital holdings. If you've mixed marital and nonmarital crypto, expect a fight over classification.
Cloud-based financial accounts: Investment platforms, retirement account portals, and banking apps all generate discoverable data. Your spouse's attorney can subpoena those records. I certainly will.


Cyber negligence is leverage in discovery. If your spouse has been careless with digital asset segregation, that's ammunition. If you've been careless, fix it now—before litigation begins.

What High-Net-Worth Clients Must Do Now

Springer reinforces principles that should govern every sophisticated divorce strategy:


Build your evidentiary record at trial. Appellate courts defer to trial court findings. If you don't create the record below, you won't win above.
Trace and document everything. Dissipation claims require proof. Asset classification requires documentation. Assumptions don't survive judicial scrutiny.
Segregate nonmarital assets religiously. Title changes and commingling are wealth killers. Keep premarital and inherited assets separate, or watch them become marital property.
Ensure procedural compliance in contempt proceedings. Whether you're pursuing or defending, procedure matters. Defective petitions get vacated.
Engage forensic experts early. Financial forensics, digital asset tracing, income analysis—these specialists win cases. Retain them before your opposition does.


Your Opposition Is Already Losing

The Fifth District's decision in Springer isn't revolutionary. It's a reminder that Illinois courts enforce the rules—and punish those who ignore them. Respondent lost on child support because he couldn't challenge the income findings. Petitioner lost on dissipation because she couldn't trace the funds. Respondent lost on asset classification because he commingled and changed titles. Both sides lost on contempt because the petitions were procedurally defective.

Every one of those losses was preventable with proper strategy, documentation, and legal counsel.

If you're facing a high-stakes Illinois divorce—significant assets, complex financial structures, digital holdings, contentious custody issues—you need representation that understands both the legal doctrine and the strategic warfare. Springer shows what happens when you don't have it.

Book a consultation now. Your opposition is already making mistakes. Let's make sure you're not.

Full Opinion (PDF): Download the full opinion

Written by Jonathan D. Steele

Chicago divorce attorney with cybersecurity certifications (Security+, ISC2 CC, Google Cybersecurity Professional Certificate). Illinois Super Lawyers Rising Star 2016-2025.

Free Case Assessment

For more insights, read our Divorce Decoded blog.