Hudson

In re Marriage of Davis

- Case citation and parties In re Marriage of Davis, 2022 IL App (1st) 210623. Petitioner: Cullen Davis; Respondent/Judgment Debtor–Appellant: Tracy Davis; Judgment Creditor–Appellee: Schiller DuCanto & Fleck LLP. - Key legal issues 1. Can a judgment creditor obtain turnover of real property that a marital settlement agreement obliges a third party (ex-spouse) to transfer to the judgment debtor before title has actually been transferred? 2. Can a judgment creditor obtain turnover/assignment of a “chose in action” (a contractual right to a $500,000 lump‑sum payment under the marital settlement agreement) payable to the judgment debtor? - Holding / outcome The appellate court affirmed. The trial court properly granted both turnover motions: (1) ordering enforcement of the marital‑agreement transfer of the Hudson property; and (2) compelling assignment/turnover of the contractual right (chose in action) to the $500,000 payment. - Significant legal reasoning (concise) - The court reviewed the turnover orders de novo (no evidentiary findings). - 735 ILCS 5/2‑1402 (supplementary proceedings) is to be construed liberally and authorizes the court to compel delivery of discovered assets or choses in action where the judgment debtor could recover them from a third party (§ 2‑1402(c)(3) and (c)(1)). - Because the marital settlement agreement gave Tracy an enforceable right to receive title to the Hudson property and to the $500,000 payment, Schiller DuCanto, as judgment creditor, could “step into her shoes” and use section 2‑1402 to compel Cullen (the third party) to effect the transfer or assign the claim. - Prior authority distinguishing non‑party enforcement of divorce decrees (e.g., Garrison) was distinguished: a judgment creditor’s statutorily authorized supplementary proceeding is a different enforcement vehicle than direct contempt or rule to show cause in the divorce case (Diaz). - The court also noted limits: nonassignable or purely speculative claims may not be subject to turnover (citing Gonzalez), but the contractual payment here was definite and assignable. - Practice implications - Judgment creditors can use section 2‑1402 to reach assets and contractual rights created by marital settlement agreements even before formal title transfer, provided the debtor has an enforceable right. - Counsel for judgment debtors in divorces should anticipate creditor exposure to settlement‑related assets/claims; consider anti‑assignment, notice, escrow, or security provisions when drafting settlements. - Creditors should verify assignability and noncontingent nature of claimed rights before pursuing turnover; use citations to discover assets and aggressively pursue turnover where rights are clear.