In re Marriage of Wingert, 2021 IL App (3d) 200165-U

- Case citation and parties
In re Marriage of Wingert, 2021 IL App (3d) 200165-U (Ill. App. Ct., 3d Dist. July 2, 2021; modified Aug. 3, 2021). Petitioner-Appellee: Hiemi Wingert. Respondent-Appellant: Russell Wingert.

- Key legal issues
1) Whether a loan secured by one spouse’s nonmarital real estate (acquired before marriage) is a nonmarital debt under 750 ILCS 5/503(a)(6.5) such that the nonowning spouse cannot be assigned responsibility for it.
2) Whether the trial court properly allocated a 2013 home-equity loan (originally $99,472.35), secured by petitioner’s nonmarital home, to respondent despite that security and the statutory presumption that property acquired before marriage remains nonmarital.

- Holding / outcome
The appellate court held the trial court erred in assigning the debt secured by petitioner’s nonmarital property to respondent. The trial court’s allocation (which had required respondent to assume the 2013 loan but provided a contingent reimbursement/lien payable on sale or foreclosure) was reversed.

- Significant legal reasoning (concise)
The appellate court applied de novo review because the material facts were undisputed. It reiterated the statutory framework: property and debts acquired during marriage are presumed marital (750 ILCS 5/503(b)(1)), but subsection 503(a) enumerates exceptions (e.g., property acquired before marriage and property acquired by the sole use of nonmarital property as collateral, §503(a)(6.5)). The party asserting a nonmarital characterization bears the burden of clear and convincing proof. Here the trial court had already found the real estate was nonmarital (purchased pre-marriage). The loans at issue were secured by that nonmarital property and the record showed the loans were used to improve or capitalize the nonmarital estate (shed, salon, and purchase of a spare parcel). The appellate court concluded those facts brought the loan within §503(a)(6.5)’s nonmarital exception and thus the trial court lacked a statutory basis to shift the 2013 debt wholesale to respondent, even though respondent had cosigned and made payments. The trial court’s ad hoc remedy (a contingent lien/reimbursement payable only on sale or foreclosure) was inconsistent with the statutory allocation principles.

- Practice implications for family-law attorneys
- Loans secured by a spouse’s pre-marriage property can remain nonmarital even when the other spouse cosigns or pays; document the source, purpose, and security of loans.
- When allocating debt, litigants and courts must apply §503 exceptions (not equitable reallocation absent statutory support) and recognize the clear-and-convincing burden.
- If the marital estate contributes to a loan on nonmarital collateral, pursue or seek explicit reimbursement remedies at final order (and document contributions) rather than relying on contingent or informal liens.
- For settlement negotiation, include express indemnity, lien, or reimbursement language to avoid later reversal on statutory grounds.