In re Marriage of Patel, 2022 IL App (1st) 211650

1) Case citation and parties
- In re Marriage of Patel, 2022 IL App (1st) 211650 (Dec. 16, 2022).
- Petitioner-Appellee: Sofia Patel. Respondent-Appellant: Atik Patel.

2) Key legal issues
- Whether the trial court abused its discretion in ordering proceeds from the sale of property awarded to respondent be placed in escrow and enjoining respondent from dispersing those funds (challenged as an impermissible prejudgment attachment).
- Whether the court’s entry of injunctive relief without an evidentiary hearing or explicit written findings required reversal.

3) Holding/outcome
- The First District affirmed the trial court’s order granting Sofia’s emergency motion to escrow proceeds and enjoining Atik from using the funds, and remanded for further proceedings consistent with the decision.

4) Significant legal reasoning (concise)
- Standard of review: interlocutory injunctive relief is reviewed for abuse of discretion (not de novo), even where no evidentiary hearing occurred.
- The appellate court distinguished the escrow/injunction from a prejudgment attachment. The injunction was an exercise of equitable power to prevent dissipation of assets that may be used to satisfy court-ordered child support and maintenance (citing Schade and related family-law authority).
- The court applied the preliminary-injunction elements: (1) clearly ascertainable right needing protection (petitioner alleged unpaid court-ordered child support/maintenance; respondent did not deny); (2) irreparable injury absent injunction (risk that proceeds would be dissipated, frustrating support enforcement); (3) no adequate remedy at law (monetary remedies could be illusory if assets are dissipated and respondent was unemployed and allegedly had a history of dissipating funds); and (4) probability of success on the merits sufficient to preserve the status quo pending adjudication.
- The court also noted the procedural posture (appellee did not file a brief) but proceeded to decide the appeal on the merits because the record was simple and the error could be resolved without an appellee brief.

5) Practice implications
- Family courts may use equitable injunctive relief (including escrow of sale proceeds) to protect enforcement of child support and maintenance, especially where there is a risk of dissipation and evidence of nonpayment.
- Emergency/escrow motions should document nonpayment, imminent closing/disposition risk, and any history of dissipation to satisfy preliminary-injunction factors.
- Counsel for the party disposing of assets must promptly disclose closing dates and should litigate objections to emergency relief on the record; appeals from such orders face the abuse-of-discretion standard.
- When seeking interlocutory review (Rule 307), preserve a clear factual record and, when possible, obtain findings or a hearing to strengthen appeal prospects.