In re Marriage of Lugo

Full Case Summary

Case Summary: In re Marriage of Eric Lugo

Court Information

Parties Involved

Background

This case concerns the dissolution of marriage between Eric and Carey Lugo under the Illinois Marriage and Dissolution of Marriage Act. Eric filed for divorce in April 2018 citing irreconcilable differences, seeking joint decision-making for their minor child A.L. and waiving child support and maintenance for both parties. The couple separated around 2014-2015, and proceedings faced delays due to Carey's non-compliance with discovery and changing counsel.

Order Overview

The trial court's dissolution judgment was affirmed based on several findings: Carey's sanctions for non-compliance with discovery under Supreme Court Rule 219; Eric established divorce grounds; and Carey's request for attorney fee contributions was denied.

Trial and Rulings

A bench trial commenced involving a guardian ad litem and numerous continuances. Key rulings from the trial court included:

• Denial of maintenance to Carey.
• Awarding Carey 30% of Eric's pension.
• Denial of Carey's request for unsupervised parenting time.
• Carey was required to pay 100% of parental supervision fees and 50% of A.L.'s healthcare expenses.

Significant Findings

Carey forfeited several challenge issues, including maintenance and income imputation, due to violations of Illinois Supreme Court Rule 341(h)(7). The trial court denied her arguments against the court’s findings regarding attorney fees and other financial responsibilities, asserting she provided no legal authority to support her claims.

Financial Overview

Both parties' finances were evaluated, with the court noting Eric had a stable income from his work as an electrician while Carey's financial status was affected by her past substance abuse issues and bankruptcy filing. Carey's request for contribution towards attorney fees was denied as the court found her financial circumstances could not substantiate a claim for financial support from Eric.

Subsequent Appeals

Carey's appeal against several rulings, including the denial for maintenance and financial contribution, was forfeited as she failed to comply with procedural rules and did not provide necessary citations. The court concluded with the affirmation of the original ruling.

Conclusion

The judgment of the circuit court is affirmed with no just reason for delay.