In re Marriage of Zisook

Summary

Case Summary: In re Marriage of Zisook - The 2025 Illinois Appellate Court case In re Marriage of Zisook highlights the complexities in high net worth divorces involving deferred compensation. The case emphasizes the importance of precise language in marital settlement agreements, compliance with court orders, and the impact of a spouse's death during divorce proceedings.

Unpacking the Complex Divorce Case of Albert and Nitza Zisook

The 2025 Illinois Appellate Court case In re Marriage of Zisook delves into the contentious divorce between Albert Zisook and Nitza Zisook. The case, spanning over a decade, highlights the complexities that can arise in high net worth divorces, particularly when deferred compensation is involved. Let's take a deep dive into the key aspects of this case and the important legal precedents it sets.

The Marital Settlement Agreement and Deferred Compensation

At the heart of the Zisook divorce case is the Marital Settlement Agreement (MSA) reached in 2015. The MSA included a critical provision stating that Albert Zisook must pay Nitza Zisook 50% of any future distributions he receives from his former employer, Citadel, LLC, as part of his deferred compensation package.

Deferred compensation refers to a portion of an employee's pay that is held back and paid out at a later date, often after the employee leaves the company. It is commonly used as a retention tool and can include stock options, restricted stock units, or cash payments. In high net worth divorces like the Zisooks', determining how to divide deferred comp between spouses can be tricky.

The key issue lies in whether the deferred compensation should be considered marital property (and thus subject to division) or separate property belonging solely to the employee spouse. The classification hinges on factors like when the deferred comp was earned, vesting schedules, distribution dates, and the specific language in the divorce agreement.

In the Zisook case, the appellate court ultimately affirmed the trial court's ruling that certain deferred compensation payments Albert received after the divorce were still marital property under the terms of the MSA. The agreement's wording was deemed "clear and unambiguous" that Nitza was entitled to 50% of those particular payments.

This finding underscores the critical importance of precision and specificity in drafting marital settlement agreements, especially when substantial assets like deferred compensation are involved. Vague or overly broad language can open the door for confusion and disputes down the line.

Contempt Proceedings and Compliance

Another major aspect of the Zisook case revolves around Nitza filing a petition for indirect civil contempt against Albert in 2019. She alleged that he failed to comply with the divorce judgment by not paying her the required 50% share of certain deferred compensation distributions he received.

Contempt proceedings in family law cases are a serious matter. If an ex-spouse is found in contempt of court for violating the terms of the divorce decree, they may face penalties like fines, attorney fee awards, or even jail time in extreme cases. The burden of proof is on the petitioner to demonstrate a "willful and contumacious" violation of a court order.

In Zisook, the trial court did find Albert in indirect civil contempt for failing to pay Nitza 50% of a $164,678 deferred compensation payment he received in February 2018, or $82,339. The court also ordered Albert to pay $8,238.75 of Nitza's attorney fees related to the contempt proceeding.

However, the court denied Nitza's claims for 50% of deferred compensation Albert received in 2019, deeming those payments as his non-marital property not subject to the MSA. This mixed result illustrates the fact-specific nature of these cases and how the timing and circumstances around different payments can lead to disparate treatment.

For those navigating high-asset divorces, the Zisook case is a cautionary tale about the perils of non-compliance with settlement agreements and court orders. Individuals must be proactive in understanding and fulfilling their obligations, or else risk costly contempt proceedings. When in doubt, it's always prudent to consult with a family law attorney for guidance.

Death of a Spouse During Divorce Appeals

A unique twist in the Zisook case came with Albert's death in July 2023, while the various appeals were still pending. This development raised questions about the fate of the appeals and the court's continued jurisdiction over the divorce matter.

The general rule is that a party's death does not automatically abate a divorce appeal. Instead, the decedent's estate may be substituted in as a party, allowing the case to proceed. The rationale is that the financial and property rights determined in a divorce judgment are of importance to the ex-spouses' heirs and beneficiaries.

Here, the appellate court found that its jurisdiction over the Zisook appeals remained valid despite Albert's death. The court reasoned that the MSA provisions on the disputed deferred compensation created rights and obligations that survived Albert's death and passed to his estate.

While the court initially stayed the appeals due to the death, it later lifted that stay and allowed the case to move forward upon the proper motions. This procedural maneuvering highlights the need for legal counsel to remain diligent and promptly address any major developments in a pending divorce case.

The death of a party during divorce proceedings or appeals is not a common scenario, but it does arise on occasion. The Zisook case provides a helpful illustration of how courts may handle such a situation to keep the process on track and ensure all parties' rights are protected to the greatest extent possible.

Key Takeaways for High Net Worth Divorces

The Zisook divorce saga offers several valuable lessons for high net worth individuals going through a divorce:

1. Specificity is key in marital settlement agreements. When dealing with complex assets like deferred compensation, the MSA provisions must be carefully worded to clearly define what is and is not considered marital property subject to division. Ambiguity will only breed conflict.
2. Compliance is crucial. Ex-spouses must take their obligations under the divorce judgment seriously and promptly take action to fulfill them. Non-compliance can lead to contempt of court findings and additional penalties beyond what was owed in the first place.
3. Seek legal guidance early and often. With so much at stake financially and emotionally in high-asset divorces, it is well worth investing in an experienced family law attorney. They can advise on critical issues, help negotiate and draft settlement agreements, ensure compliance, and advocate zealously in any necessary court proceedings.
4. Stay the course, even if circumstances change. Divorce cases and their appeals can drag on for years. During that time, major life events may occur like the death of an ex-spouse. It's important to work with counsel to properly address any changed circumstances and keep the process moving forward as efficiently as possible.

The Zisook case is a reminder of just how complex and contentious high net worth divorces can become, especially when substantial deferred compensation is in the mix. By learning from the Zisooks' experience and heeding these key lessons, divorcing individuals can better position themselves to achieve fair, workable outcomes and avoid costly enforcement disputes down the road.

References

Full Opinion (PDF): Download the full opinion

For more insights, read our Divorce Decoded blog.