In re Marriage of McAllister, 2024 IL App (5th) 230409-U

1) Case citation and parties
- In re Marriage of McAllister, No. 5-23-0409, 2024 IL App (5th) 230409-U (Ill. App. Ct., 5th Dist., filed Mar. 5, 2024; Rule 23 order — non‑precedential).
- Petitioner‑Appellant: Barbara J. McAllister. Respondent‑Appellee: Robert D. McAllister.

2) Key legal issues
- Whether the trial court properly terminated post‑dissolution maintenance under the marital settlement agreement (MSA) where respondent alleged petitioner was cohabiting with another person “on a resident, continuing, and conjugal basis.”
- Whether the trial court’s factual findings (including credibility determinations that supported a finding of a de facto marriage/cohabitation) were against the manifest weight of the evidence.

3) Holding / outcome
- Affirmed. The appellate court upheld the trial court’s January 19, 2023 order terminating Robert’s maintenance obligation (and attendant judgment in his favor), and denied relief on Barbara’s posthearing motion. The court found the trial court’s credibility rulings and factual findings were not against the manifest weight of the evidence.

4) Significant legal reasoning (condensed)
- The MSA expressly allowed termination of maintenance upon a party’s cohabitation on a resident, continuing, and conjugal basis. The factual record showed: sustained cohabitation (John and his son lived with Barbara March 2020–April 2021), sexual intimacy, financial support (Barbara purchased vehicles and listed John as transfer‑on‑death beneficiary; she provided funds while he was unemployed), shared household living (meals, chores, care for disabled son), and social/family integration (attendance at family events, introductions to family).
- The trial court permissibly credited Robert’s evidence (including private‑investigator findings) and discredited Barbara in part after impeachment with prior deposition testimony. The appellate court emphasized that credibility and weight of the evidence are for the trier of fact; there was sufficient circumstantial and direct evidence to support a de facto marriage/cohabitation finding and termination of maintenance. Summary‑judgment denial earlier did not preclude a factfinder’s later adverse credibility assessment at trial.

5) Practice implications for counsel
- When litigating maintenance termination for cohabitation, develop contemporaneous documentary evidence: titles/designations (TOD), financial transfers, receipts, travel/household expense records, photos, communications, and PI reports.
- Anticipate and exploit impeachment opportunities (prior depositions, inconsistent statements). Credibility determinations are often dispositive — jury or bench trials can overturn summary judgment determinations.
- For payors, aggressively pursue discovery into living arrangements and financial interdependence; for payees, insulate arrangements with clear contemporaneous explanations and documentation (especially when temporary circumstances like COVID are invoked).
- Note: decision filed under Rule 23 — persuasive but not controlling precedent.