In re Marriage of Cholach, 2024 IL App (1st) 221927-U

1. Case citation and parties
- In re Marriage of Cholach, No. 1-22-1927, 2024 IL App (1st) 221927-U (1st Dist. Feb. 15, 2024) (Rule 23 order; non-precedential).
- Petitioner/Appellee: Yaryna Cholach. Respondent/Appellant: Nazar Cholach.

2. Key legal issues
- Whether the trial court properly (a) awarded $25,000 in interim attorney fees to the wife; (b) entered judgment for $4,909 in unpaid child-care/school/camp expenses; and (c) awarded $2,500 in 508(b) fees (attorney fees for costs caused by respondent’s failure to pay GAL retainer).
- Whether the circuit court properly found Nazar in indirect civil contempt for failing to comply with those orders (and whether the contempt and purge amount were appropriate).

3. Holding/outcome
- The Appellate Court affirmed. The trial court’s awards ($25,000 interim fees; $4,909 child-related arrears; $2,500 508(b) fees), the contempt finding, and the issuance of a body attachment and $32,409 purge were upheld.

4. Significant legal reasoning
- Appealability: The contempt order imposing monetary sanctions was immediately appealable under Ill. S. Ct. R. 304(b)(5). The court proceeded despite the appellee not filing a brief (found the record and issues simple enough).
- Contempt analysis: The court treated the sanction as indirect civil contempt. To sustain civil contempt the trial court must find willful noncompliance and that the contemnor has the ability to purge (i.e., the coercive nature requires “keys to his cell”). The trial court’s factual findings that Nazar wilfully failed to pay court-ordered items and had financial resources were supported by business deposit records, transfers, and other testimony. Appellate review affords deference to trial-court credibility and factual findings and will not disturb them unless against the manifest weight of the evidence.
- Interim attorney fees: Trial court properly considered relative financial ability and need; findings that wife lacked funds and husband had greater available cash were supported.
- 508(b) fees: Award justified because respondent’s failure to pay GAL retainer caused unnecessary attorney time and costs; billing was found reasonable and necessary.

5. Practice implications (for litigators)
- Treat interim orders (attorney-fee awards, child-related expense allocations, GAL retainers) as enforceable obligations; willful noncompliance risks contempt, purge orders, and body attachment.
- When seeking interim fees, present clear evidence of (1) movant’s inability to pay, (2) respondent’s ability to pay (bank records, deposits/transfers), and (3) itemized, reasonable billing.
- For defense, assemble contemporaneous financial records to prove true inability to pay, promptly object to invoices, appear at enforcement hearings, and timely litigate reasonableness of fee petitions.
- Beware that failure to appear or to produce financial evidence undermines chances to avoid contempt; appellate courts defer substantially to trial-court fact and credibility determinations in these contexts.