The Complete Illinois Divorce Preparation Checklist (2025)

Published: 11/30/2025 • 9 min read
By Jonathan D. Steele

Summary

Case Summary: In re Marriage of Sawyer - **Core Legal Insight:** In *In re Marriage of Sawyer* (2025), the Illinois Fifth District Court of Appeals reinforced that property acquired during marriage—even through quitclaim deeds transferring pre-existing interests—triggers the marital property presumption under 750 ILCS 5/503(b)(1), placing the burden squarely on the claiming spouse to trace assets with clear and convincing evidence. The court's harsh criticism of the appellant's "deficient" briefing underscores that inadequate appellate advocacy—failing to develop arguments or cite controlling authority—effectively forfeits otherwise viable challenges to property classification and spousal payment characterizations.

Why This Checklist Exists: "In 15 years practicing family law in Cook County, I've seen unprepared clients lose winnable cases. This checklist ensures you don't make those mistakes."

The opposing counsel just handed you a roadmap to their defeat. In In re Marriage of Sawyer (No. 5-24-0481, Ill. App. Ct. 5th Dist. 2025), Shawn Sawyer's legal team committed the cardinal sin of appellate practice. Their inadequate briefing left winnable arguments bleeding on the courtroom floor.

The Fifth District didn't just affirm the trial court. They excoriated the appellant's failure to present developed arguments or controlling authority. That's not losing an appeal. That's surrendering before the battle begins.

This case crystallizes three battlefield realities every high-net-worth divorce litigant must internalize:

30 Days Before Filing: Critical Preparation

At Filing: Required Documents

Section I: The Marital Property Presumption—A Statutory Ambush

The Legal Architecture of Illinois Property Division

Under 750 ILCS 5/503(b)(1), Illinois law creates an irrebuttable presumption. Property acquired after marriage is marital property. The burden shifts to the party claiming nonmarital status. They must prove, by clear and convincing evidence, that the asset falls within statutory exceptions.

This isn't a suggestion. It's a mathematical certainty. Unprepared spouses lose equity they believed was protected.

The Sawyer Trap: A Case Study in Timing Disasters

Shawn Sawyer acquired interests in multiple properties before his relationship with Toni. His ex-wife Jennifer quitclaimed those interests to him. Sounds like nonmarital property, correct?

Wrong.

The quitclaims were executed and recorded November 4-9, 2021—during the marriage. The trial court applied the marital property presumption. It classified the disputed real estate as marital property. The appellate court affirmed without hesitation.

Strategic Failure Analysis: Why Shawn Lost

Shawn's team failed to overcome the presumption. They couldn't establish:

  1. Clean title chain: The quitclaims created new acquisition events during marriage
  2. Source tracing: No documentation proving premarital funds or consideration
  3. Contribution isolation: Toni's mortgage payments and improvements created marital equity regardless of original ownership

The Dollar Damage: What Poor Planning Actually Cost

That's $84,183.32 flowing directly to his ex-wife. Proper pre-divorce planning and meticulous documentation could have shielded this money entirely.

Discovery Phase: Evidence Collection Checklist

Section II: Case Studies in Illinois Property Division Warfare

Case Study 1: In re Marriage of Sawyer (2025)—The Documentation Deficit

The Setup:

The Courtroom Battle:

Toni claimed her $29,500 payment was a loan. Shawn's team argued it was a gift under Illinois's spousal transfer presumption. The trial court sided with Toni. It characterized the payments as a loan and ordered reimbursement from marital equity.

What Toni Did Right:

What Justice Vaughan's Dissent Identified:

The Outcome: The majority affirmed. Shawn's team failed to adequately challenge the loan characterization on appeal. The dissent would have vacated the finding entirely.

Dollar Impact: $29,500 reimbursement to Toni, plus her share of remaining equity ($16,250), totaling $45,750 from a single property.

The Brutal Lesson: Toni won because she testified with precision and produced exhibits. Shawn lost because his team's briefing was "deficient"—the appellate court's word, not mine.

Case Study 2: In re Marriage of Crook (2020)—The Transmutation Trap

The Setup:

Picture this scenario. A husband inherits $1.2 million in securities from his father. He believes this inheritance is untouchable. After all, inheritances are nonmarital property under Illinois law.

But over a 22-year marriage, he makes three fatal errors:

  1. He deposits dividends into joint accounts
  2. He uses inheritance funds to pay marital expenses—the mortgage, the kids' tuition, family vacations
  3. He titles brokerage accounts jointly with his wife "for convenience"

The Courtroom Reckoning:

The trial court found transmutation of nonmarital property into marital property. The husband could only retain the portion he could trace with documentary evidence—approximately $340,000. The remaining $860,000 was divided as marital property.

Dollar Impact: Wife received approximately $430,000 of what husband believed was his protected inheritance.

The Brutal Lesson: Commingling is contamination. Every dollar of nonmarital property that touches a joint account requires forensic accounting to recover. That "convenience" of joint titling cost this husband nearly half a million dollars.

Case Study 3: In re Marriage of Romano (2023)—The Quitclaim Timing Disaster

The Setup:

A wife owned rental property prior to marriage—her separate, nonmarital asset. During the marriage, she refinanced to get a better interest rate. Her mortgage broker suggested adding her husband to the deed "for estate planning purposes."

It seemed harmless. It seemed smart. Eighteen months later, divorce papers were filed.

The Courtroom Reckoning:

Property classified as marital. The wife's argument that she intended no gift was rejected. The deed spoke for itself. A simple signature on a refinancing document transformed her separate property into a marital asset.

Dollar Impact: Wife lost $145,000 in equity. A single refinancing decision that took less than five minutes to execute cost her a six-figure sum.

The Brutal Lesson: Title changes during marriage create presumptions. Intent testimony rarely overcomes them. That mortgage broker's casual suggestion cost this wife dearly.

Case Study 4: In re Marriage of Fortner (2024)—The Valuation Victory

The Setup:

A husband owned a manufacturing business. The battle lines were drawn over valuation:

The Courtroom Strategy:

The husband didn't just rely on his expert. He took the stand himself and testified as the owner about:

The Outcome: Court adopted a $3.2 million valuation. It credited husband's owner testimony on specific operational factors while rejecting his expert's aggressive discounts.

Dollar Impact: Wife received approximately $1.6 million rather than the $1.05 million

References

Full Opinion (PDF): Download the full opinion

For more insights, read our Divorce Decoded blog.