In re Marriage of Agee, 2021 IL App (5th) 150153-U

- Case citation and parties
In re Marriage of Agee, 2021 IL App (5th) 150153-U. Petitioner-Appellee: Shannon Agee (n/k/a Jordan). Respondent-Appellant: James Agee.

- Key legal issues
1. Whether settlement proceeds that James received from Geico for an alleged motor‑vehicle injury are marital or nonmarital property and, if marital, whether child support may be ordered from those proceeds.
2. Whether the trial court complied with the appellate mandate from the parties’ prior appeal (Agee I) and acted within its authority on remand.
3. Whether the trial court abused its discretion in awarding attorney fees (including allocation of guardian ad litem fees) to Shannon.
4. Whether modifications to summer parenting time and the denial of James’s request to change allocation of parental responsibilities were against the manifest weight of the evidence.
5. Evidentiary/discovery concerns (whether post‑settlement medical bills or other documents could be considered).

- Holding/outcome
The Fifth District affirmed the trial court in all respects. The court upheld characterization of the Geico settlement as marital (net proceeds $34,664.54), affirmed the order that James pay child support from those proceeds (trial court had ordered 20% to Shannon), affirmed attorney‑fee awards and GAL fee allocation, and affirmed the parenting‑time modification and denial of reallocation of parental responsibilities.

- Significant legal reasoning (summary)
- The appellate court found no error in the trial court’s post‑remand factual findings about the settlement (recorded Geico payments, deductions, and a signed release denying liability), and therefore no error in treating the net settlement proceeds as subject to division/child‑support claims.
- The trial court properly declined to consider medical bills incurred after the settlement when those bills had not been produced in discovery; discovery failures limited James’s ability to offset or characterize proceeds as nonmarital.
- Attorney fees and GAL fees awards were within the trial court’s discretion, particularly given documented discovery abuses and the additional litigation incurred.
- Parenting decisions were factual credibility determinations (custody factors, evidence of anger/alienation), and the appellate court deferred to the trial court’s findings — not against manifest weight.

- Practice implications for family lawyers (concise)
- Personal‑injury or insurance settlements received during a marriage can be treated as marital property and reached for child support unless properly traced/established as nonmarital; obtain and preserve complete lien/medical‑bill records and releases.
- Produce relevant bills/documents in discovery promptly or risk preclusion of offsets.
- Voluntary job loss or inadequate proof of employment efforts can support income imputation for child‑support calculations.
- Document discovery abuses and litigation conduct to support fee petitions and GAL fee allocations.
- Appellate courts give deference to trial courts on credibility, custody, and discretionary fee decisions; develop the factual record accordingly.