In re Marriage of Phalen, 2023 IL App (3d) 220296-U

- Case citation and parties
In re Marriage of Phalen, 2023 IL App (3d) 220296‑U (Ill. App. Ct., 3d Dist. Sept. 26, 2023) (Rule 23 order, not precedent). Petitioner‑Appellant: Steve Phalen. Respondent‑Appellee: Holly L. Phalen.

- Key legal issues
1. Whether the circuit court mischaracterized certain assets (Crestliner boat, Streator home, Jayco trailer, fifth‑wheel camper) as marital property.
2. Whether the court erred in awarding the parties’ companion animals (two German shepherds and two chows) without applying the companion animal factors in 750 ILCS 5/503(n).
3. Whether the property division was an abuse of discretion or against the manifest weight of the evidence.

- Holding/outcome
The Third District affirmed. The court held the classification of the disputed assets as marital property was not against the manifest weight of the evidence, and the trial court’s distribution of marital assets (Crestliner boat and Streator home awarded to Steve; Jayco trailer and fifth‑wheel camper awarded to Holly; dogs split 2–2) was not an abuse of discretion. Several issues were deemed waived for failure to preserve them below.

- Significant legal reasoning
- Waiver: The appellate court enforced preservation rules — issues not raised in the trial court or in a timely posttrial motion were waived (Crestliner, Streator, and the challenge to awarding Herc). Trial counsel expressly conceded the Jayco award below (argued only classification disagreement), resulting in waiver of that challenge.
- Burden of proof/tracing: For the fifth‑wheel camper, the court found Steve failed to overcome the presumption of marital property. Although Steve claimed nonmarital escrow funds paid for disputed assets, the record lacked reliable, specific proof (checks, cashier’s checks, contemporaneous documentation) showing tracing from nonmarital escrow to the purchases. The parties’ stipulation established only a $1,000 down payment, monthly payments from a personal account, and sole title to Steve; after supplemental inquiries the trial court still found the evidence insufficient.
- Standard of review: Characterization and division of marital property reviewed for manifest weight and abuse of discretion; appellate court deferred to trial court credibility and factual findings.

- Practice implications
- Preserve issues: Raise and brief classification and valuation disputes in the trial court and in a written posttrial motion. Concede only what you intend to preserve.
- Tracing evidence: When asserting nonmarital funds paid for an asset, present clear contemporaneous records (cancelled checks, cashier’s checks, bank statements, wire records, receipts) and tie funds directly to the purchase.
- Stipulations: Be careful with stipulations — they can lock in facts harmful to your position.
- Companion animals: If claiming allocation under 503(n), expressly raise and produce evidence regarding the animal’s well‑being and ownership before and during trial.
- Expect deference: Trial courts have broad discretion in classifying/dividing assets; absent clear record support, appellate reversal is unlikely.