A high-net-worth divorce is not governed by special Illinois divorce laws. The Illinois Marriage and Dissolution of Marriage Act applies regardless of how much the marital estate is worth. The court still classifies property, assigns each spouse’s non-marital property to that spouse, divides marital property, determines maintenance, calculates child support, and enters a final judgment dissolving the marriage.
In a normal divorce, the main questions often are simple enough to answer with tax returns, paystubs, a house appraisal, retirement account statements, and the statutory support formulas. Yet, in a high-net-worth divorce, those tools may only provide the beginning of the analysis. Income might come from wages, bonuses, retained earnings, carried interest, trusts, distributions, stock options, restricted stock, rental properties, private investments, or business entities. Assets may be valuable but illiquid. A spouse may appear wealthy on paper but have limited monthly cash flow. Another spouse may have access to lifestyle benefits that never appear as ordinary W-2 income.
Illinois law divides marital property “in just proportions” and requires the court to assign each spouse’s non-marital property to that spouse. 750 ILCS 5/503(d). Thus, a lawyer representing a high-net-worth individual is unable to treat the case as a simple 50/50 division. The lawyer must determine what property exists, whether each asset is marital or non-marital, what each asset is worth, and whether the proposed division can truly be performed.
The same is true for support. Illinois child support starts with an income-shares calculation; the court determines each parent’s monthly net income, adds the incomes together, selects the corresponding amount from the schedule of basic child support obligations, and calculates each parent’s percentage share. 750 ILCS 5/505(a)(1.5). When the parents’ combined income exceeds the schedule, the statute states that “[a] court may use its discretion to determine child support,” but “the basic child support obligation shall not be less than the highest level of combined net income set forth in the schedule.” 750 ILCS 5/505(a)(3.5).
Maintenance changes in high-income cases, as well. Illinois guideline maintenance is applicable “[i]f the combined gross annual income of the parties is less than $500,000” and the payor has no prior child support or maintenance obligation, unless the court finds the guideline application inappropriate. 750 ILCS 5/504(b-1)(1). When it does not apply, “[a]ny non-guidelines award of maintenance shall be made after the court’s consideration of all relevant factors” in section 504(a). 750 ILCS 5/504(b-1)(2).
In sum, a high-net-worth divorce is nonetheless an Illinois divorce. The lawyer still starts with the statute but also needs admissible evidence and a workable judgment. Yet, in a high-net-worth divorce, the lawyer should not assume the ordinary formulas, discovery, and settlement terms will be sufficient.
High Net Worth Does Not Always Mean High Cash Flow
A wealthy divorce client is not always a “liquid” divorce client.
A party can own a profitable business but receive a small salary. A party can hold real estate that has appreciated substantially but produces little available income. A party can have access to large assets but have tax obligations, debt, or business restrictions that cause those assets to be difficult to divide.
That distinction is important because Illinois divorce courts divide property and determine support based on evidence, not impressions. A lawyer is not allowed to walk into court and just assert that the client is wealthy or that the other spouse can afford it. The lawyer has to identify the source of the wealth, whether the wealth is income or property, and whether the property is marital or non-marital. Additionally, the lawyer must determine whether the asset can be valued and whether the asset can be transferred, sold, refinanced, or offset.
Under Illinois law, marital property typically is property, debts, and obligations acquired by either spouse after the marriage, except for property classified as non-marital under the statute. 750 ILCS 5/503(a). The court must additionally “make specific factual findings” about asset classification, values, and the factual basis for the property award. 750 ILCS 5/503(a). Property acquired during the marriage is presumed marital, and that presumption can only be overcome by “clear and convincing evidence.” 750 ILCS 5/503(b)(1).
The statute addresses reimbursement when marital and non-marital estates have been mixed. When one estate contributes to another, “the contributing estate shall be reimbursed,” yet reimbursement is not allowed for a contribution that is not traceable by “clear and convincing evidence” or that “was a gift.” 750 ILCS 5/503(c)(2)(A).
This is precisely why net worth is not enough. If you are a divorce lawyer, you must know what kind of net worth exists in the marital estate.
For example, a $12 million brokerage account is different from a $12 million closely held business. A $12 million inherited trust is different from a $12 million marital investment portfolio.
A spouse’s lifestyle can imply wealth, but lifestyle by itself does not explain whether the wealth is marital property, non-marital property, income, borrowed money, or business-paid personal expenses.
It is also important to remember not to confuse spending with income. Sometimes, wealthy families fund their lives through loans, distributions, reimbursements, capital gains, or asset sales. Some live beyond their real income. Some have income that is discretionary, irregular, or controlled by a business entity.
Illinois child support law is written broadly so that more than a paycheck is captured. For child support, gross income means “all income from all sources,” subject to statutory exclusions. 750 ILCS 5/505(a)(3)(A). For business owners, “business” includes closely held corporations, partnerships, flow-through entities, and self-employment. 750 ILCS 5/505(a)(3.1). Net business income refers to gross receipts minus the “ordinary and necessary expenses” required to carry on the business. 750 ILCS 5/505(a)(3.1).
Business benefits may also replace ordinary income. A business reimbursement or “in-kind payment,” including a “company car, reimbursed meals, free housing, or a housing allowance,” may be counted as income when it is significant and reduces personal expenses. 750 ILCS 5/505(a)(3.1)(B).
Illinois law also accounts for unpredictable income. If support cannot be expressed as just a dollar amount due to income being uncertain as to “source, time of payment, or amount,” the court may order percentage support in addition to a specific dollar amount. 750 ILCS 5/505(a)(5).
The First 72 Hours Should Build The Financial Map
The beginning of a high-net-worth divorce should be organized around what the financial universe actually looks like. Before anything, a lawyer needs a financial map. That map should identify the people, entities, assets, accounts, income streams, debts, and documents that explain the marital estate.
In the first few days, the lawyer should gather the obvious financial information, including paystubs, bank statements, tax returns, credit card statements, mortgage statements, loan documents, W-2s, 1099s, K-1s, brokerage statements, retirement accounts, and financial affidavits.
However, in a high-net-worth case, those documents are often not enough. So, the lawyer needs to also ask about information like business entities, trusts, estate planning documents, private investments, operating agreements, shareholder agreements, partnership agreements, buy-sell agreements, deferred compensation plans, stock options, real estate holdings, and large recurring expenses.
The financial map should identify the professionals around the family, too. These professionals may be accountants, financial advisors, bankers, estate planners, bookkeepers, business managers, corporate attorneys, and insurance professionals. As the lawyer, your job is to determine who has the relevant documents and who understands the structure.
Early mapping matters. Illinois courts need evidence before they can classify, value, and divide property. The court has discretion to determine the value of marital and non-marital property as of the date of trial or another date agreed by the parties or ordered by the court. 750 ILCS 5/503(f). It may also enter judgments that impact marital property as may be just. 750 ILCS 5/503(i). A lawyer is unable to ask for a just property award without first knowing what property exists and what evidence will be needed to prove its value.
The financial map also ensures the case does not become a generic discovery exercise. In a straightforward divorce, generic discovery can work, but it is typically inadequate in a high-net-worth divorce. If you are the lawyer, do not send standard interrogatories and wait. You should use the financial map to determine what records are needed, what assets require expert valuation, what subpoenas are necessary, what accounts need tracing, and whether any immediate preservation problems exist.
The map should guide the support analysis. If the parties’ combined income exceeds the child support schedule, the court can determine child support above the schedule, yet the basic obligation cannot be less than the highest schedule amount. 750 ILCS 5/505(a)(3.5). If the parties’ combined gross annual income exceeds the guideline maintenance threshold, the lawyer needs to be ready to prove maintenance through statutory factors rather than relying on the formula. 750 ILCS 5/504(b-1).
Sequencing High-Net-Worth Discovery
Discovery is broad in Illinois. Supreme Court Rule 201 permits “full disclosure” regarding matters relevant to the pending action, which includes documents, tangible things, and those with knowledge of relevant facts. Ill. S. Ct. R. 201(b)(1). This defines documents broadly enough to include “records, accounts, communications and electronically stored information.” Id.
Illinois courts recognize broad discovery discretion. Still, they do not recognize unlimited discovery. In In re Marriage of Daniels, the appellate court explained “the trial court is given great latitude in defining the scope of discovery” since “the range of relevant information includes both facts admissible at trial and that which leads to what is admissible at trial.” In re Marriage of Daniels, 240 Ill. App. 3d 314, 324 (1992). However, it warned that the trial court “does not have discretion to compel disclosure of information which is privileged or otherwise exempted by statute or by common law.” Id.
To be clear, broad discovery is not unfocused discovery. Duplicative discovery and requests “disproportionate in terms of burden or expense should be avoided.” Ill. S. Ct. R. 201(a). Additionally, the court weighs whether the “likely burden or expense” of proposed discovery outweighs its likely benefit; it considers the amount in controversy, the parties’ resources, the importance of the issues, and the importance of the requested discovery in fixing those issues. Ill. S. Ct. R. 201(c)(3).
The proportionality language is important in a high-net-worth divorce because a wealthy spouse may have several accounts, entities, residences, business records, trust documents, private investment records, and more. Asking for all that information at one time can cause delays, objections, privilege problems, and unnecessary expenses.
The safer approach is sequenced discovery.
To understand the financial structure, first use orientation discovery. That typically means financial affidavits, bank and brokerage statements, tax returns, retirement records, K-1s, trust information, premarital or postnuptial agreements, and major contracts. Illinois financial affidavits must be “supported by documentary evidence,” including income tax returns, pay stubs, and banking statements. 750 ILCS 5/501(a)(1). The court can examine any disparity between a sworn affidavit and the supporting documents. 750 ILCS 5/501(a)(1).
Second, preserve records that might disappear or change, such as texts, emails, accounting files, bank downloads, brokerage records, business communications, and documents held by accountants, bookkeepers, business managers, or trustees.
Third, send targeted document requests. Illinois Supreme Court Rule 214 permits a party to request documents, tangible things, electronically stored information, and access to real estate when relevant to the action. Ill. S. Ct. R. 214(a). If no form is specified for electronically stored information, it has to be produced “in a form or forms in which it is ordinarily maintained or in a reasonably usable form or forms.” Ill. S. Ct. R. 214(b). Further, documents need to be produced “as they are kept in the usual course of business” or organized and labeled to match the request categories. Ill. S. Ct. R. 214(c).
Fourth, experts should be used once the structure is understood. A valuation expert needs to understand what interest is being valued, what valuation date matters, what restrictions apply, and whether goodwill, debt, tax consequences, retained earnings, or liquidity impact the number. A forensic accountant needs to understand the accounts and entities that matter. The Illinois Marriage and Dissolution of Marriage Act recognizes that some cases involve “the degree of complexity of the issues,” including “valuation or division (or both) of closely held businesses,” tax planning, expert investigations, expert witnesses, and “each party’s access to relevant information.” 750 ILCS 5/501(c-1)(1)(F), (G).
Lastly, implement depositions to test the financial story built from the documents. Illinois discovery is broad, yet it should be directed toward truth, not volume. In Dufour v. Mobil Oil Corp., the appellate court explained, “[r]elevance for discovery purposes includes not only what is admissible at trial, but also that which leads to admissible evidence,” and that discovery discretion should be exercised with “the goal [of] the ascertainment of the truth” in mind. 301 Ill. App. 3d 156, 160 (1998).
Discovery failures can have consequences; the remedy should fit the problem. In In re Marriage of A’Hearn, the appellate court stated that “[a] sanction that results in the dismissal of litigation is considered drastic and should only be employed when all other enforcement efforts have failed.” 408 Ill. App. 3d 1091, 1099 (2011). It further stated that dismissal is appropriate when a litigant has demonstrated a “deliberate and contumacious disregard for the court’s authority.” Id. Since the trial court barred all of the father’s witnesses after “insufficient enforcement efforts,” and the sanction had the impact of dismissing his custody petition, the appellate court held the trial court abused its discretion. Id. at 1099-1100.
High-net-worth discovery is not only about asking for more records. It is also about asking in the right order so the structure is fully understood, the evidence is preserved, the targeted documents are requested, the right experts are used, and the financial story is proven without turning discovery into an unnecessary expense.
Child Support For Wealthy Parents Is Guided By The Schedule, But Not Capped By It
In a high-net-worth Illinois divorce, child support is not an unlimited lifestyle payment.
Illinois child support begins with the income-shares model. The court “shall compute the basic child support obligation” by determining “each parent’s monthly net income,” adding the parents’ monthly net incomes together, selecting the appropriate amount from the schedule of basic child support obligations, and calculating “each parent’s percentage share of the basic child support obligation.” 750 ILCS 5/505(a)(1.5).
The formula works well when the parents’ combined net income falls within the schedule. It becomes less automatic when the parents’ income exceeds that schedule. Therefore, “[a] court may use its discretion to determine child support if the combined adjusted net income of the parties exceeds the highest level of the schedule of basic child support obligation,” but “the basic child support obligation shall not be less than the highest level of combined net income set forth in the schedule of basic child support obligation.” 750 ILCS 5/505(a)(3.5).
In other words, the schedule does not disappear in a wealthy-parent case. It sets the floor. Above that floor, the Illinois divorce court has discretion.
That discretion still should be tied to evidence. A parent’s wealth does not automatically mean any requested amount is proper. If you are the lawyer, you need to prove the child’s actual needs, the parents’ financial resources, the parenting schedule, the child’s lifestyle during the marriage, and the expenses that are actually for the child. The court must apply the child support guidelines unless it makes a finding that applying them would be inappropriate, “after considering the best interests of the child in light of the evidence.” 750 ILCS 5/505(a)(2).
The statute expressly includes “the financial resources and needs of the child,” “the financial resources and needs of the parents,” “the standard of living the child would have enjoyed had the marriage or civil union not been dissolved,” and “the physical and emotional condition of the child and his or her educational needs.” 750 ILCS 5/505(a)(2)(A)-(D).
The Illinois child support schedule was extended in 2026 “to cover combined net income up to $27,374.99 per month,” where it was “previously capped at $26,724.99.” 2026 Addendum to the Illinois Schedule of Basic Obligations and Standardized Net Income Table, Ill. Dep’t of Healthcare & Fam. Servs., at 2. The addendum also provides that “Appendix B contains the updated schedule.” Id. If the parents’ combined adjusted net income exceeds the highest schedule level, the court may use discretion to determine child support, yet the basic obligation cannot be less than the highest schedule amount. 750 ILCS 5/505(a)(3.5).
For the payor, the argument is that support needs to meet the child’s reasonable needs without becoming disguised maintenance or a wealth transfer.
For the recipient, the argument is that the child does not need to experience an artificially reduced lifestyle when the parents possess the resources to maintain the child’s standard of living.
The base support number is not the entire analysis. The court may also order contributions to “reasonable school and extracurricular activity expenses” meant to enhance the child’s “educational, athletic, social, or cultural development.” 750 ILCS 5/505(a)(3.6). Further, it may order contributions to “reasonable child care expenses.” 750 ILCS 5/505(a)(3.7). These may include tutoring, lessons, private school, sports, camps, childcare, or medical specialists; the lawyer still must prove which expenses are reasonable, child-related, and affordable. See 750 ILCS 5/505(a)(3.6), (3.7).
A high-net-worth parent should not assume support will be capped at the schedule amount. The statute creates a floor, gives the court discretion above that floor, and also allows reasonable child-related add-ons.
The Maintenance Formula In High-Income Cases
In a high-net-worth Illinois divorce, maintenance is different because the statutory formula may not control.
Under Illinois law, the court “may grant a maintenance award for either spouse in amounts and for periods of time as the court deems just,” and it must first decide whether maintenance is appropriate after considering the statutory factors. 750 ILCS 5/504(a). Those factors include the parties’ income and property, earning capacity, impairment of earning capacity, needs, the standard of living established during the marriage, duration of the marriage, age, health, sources of income, tax consequences, and “any other factor that the court expressly finds to be just and equitable.” 750 ILCS 5/504(a).
Guideline maintenance applies only “[i]f the combined gross annual income of the parties is less than $500,000” and the payor has no prior child support or maintenance obligation, unless the court finds the guideline application inappropriate. 750 ILCS 5/504(b-1)(1). Where the case is outside the guidelines, “[a]ny non-guidelines award of maintenance shall be made after the court’s consideration of all relevant factors” in section 504(a). 750 ILCS 5/504(b-1)(2).
A lawyer therefore cannot rely on a calculator. Rather, the lawyer must prove the statutory factors with evidence, including earning capacity, income sources, property division, cash flow, lifestyle, and the recipient spouse’s reasonable needs.
In Illinois, the trial court has broad discretion over maintenance. In In re Marriage of Brill, the appellate court stated, “[t]he amount of a maintenance award lies within the sound discretion of the trial court,” and the award will not be reversed without an abuse of discretion. 2017 IL App (2d) 160604, ¶ 26.
High-income maintenance cases also demonstrate why maintenance should not be treated like a simple percentage of income. In In re Marriage of Heroy, after finding that the parties had enjoyed a “lavish standard of living” and that the wife could not reasonably maintain that lifestyle on her own, the original dissolution judgment ordered $35,000 per month in permanent maintenance. 2017 IL 120205, ¶ 3. In later modification proceedings, the Illinois Supreme Court affirmed a reduced award of $27,500 per month, reasoning that the award was “based on consideration of a number of factors, not a strict percentage” of the payor’s cash flow. Id. ¶ 31.
Put simply, maintenance is not automatic and it is not arithmetic in a high-net-worth divorce. Instead, it is fact-driven and depends on income, earning capacity, assets, lifestyle, and the court’s idea of what is just.
Standard Of Living In A Wealthy Divorce
Standard of living is more important when there is enough money to maintain it. Illinois law requires the court to consider “the standard of living established during the marriage” when deciding maintenance. 750 ILCS 5/504(a)(7). It further must consider the parties’ needs, income, property, earning capacity, sources of income, tax consequences, and the duration of the marriage. 750 ILCS 5/504(a).
So, if you are the lawyer, do not just describe the marital lifestyle, but prove it. Standard of living evidence can include housing, household staff, vehicles, club memberships, travel, vacations, recurring gifts, dining, security, and business-paid personal expenses.
Illinois cases view standard of living as central to maintenance. In In re Marriage of Culp, the appellate court stated, “[t]he benchmark for determining the amount of maintenance is the recipient’s reasonable needs in light of the standard of living established during the marriage.” 341 Ill. App. 3d 390, 398 (2003). It noted that the former wife’s post-dissolution expenses reflected “a standard of living significantly lower than she enjoyed during the marriage.” Id.
Standard of living is not a blank check, though. In In re Marriage of Micheli, the appellate court explained maintenance is designed to allow the recipient spouse “to maintain the standard of living enjoyed during the marriage.” 2014 IL App (2d) 121245, ¶ 24. The court reversed an uncapped bonus-based maintenance provision since it caused a “potential windfall” and had “no evidentiary relation to her present needs or the parties’ standard of living during the marriage.” Id. ¶¶ 24-25.
That is the key distinction. A lawyer should not just argue that the payor is rich. Instead, the lawyer should prove what the marital lifestyle actually costs, what part of that lifestyle is reasonable to continue, what the recipient spouse is able to pay, and what the payor is able to afford without speculation.
Standard of living is powerful evidence when it is tied to records, but it is weak evidence when it is simply a description of expensive habits.
Equal Division Is Not Always Equitable Division
In Illinois marital property is not automatically divided 50/50.
The court must assign each spouse’s non-marital property to that spouse and divide marital property “without regard to marital misconduct in just proportions considering all relevant factors.” 750 ILCS 5/503(d). Those factors include each party’s contribution to the property, “the value of the property assigned to each spouse,” the duration of the marriage, “the relevant economic circumstances of each spouse,” each party’s income, estate, liabilities, needs, and “the reasonable opportunity of each spouse for future acquisition of capital assets and income.” 750 ILCS 5/503(d)(1), (3), (5), (8), (11).
This is important in a high-net-worth divorce; one spouse might leave the marriage with substantial non-marital property, whereas the other spouse might have little or none. The court cannot divide the non-marital estate. However, it can consider the parties’ overall economic circumstances when dividing the marital estate.
In In re Marriage of Zweig, the appellate court noted that “[w]hile a property distribution is meant to be in ‘just proportions,’ that does not mean that the division must be equal.” 343 Ill. App. 3d 590, 601 (2003). The court further stated that “[a]n award of a greater percentage of assets does not necessarily mean that the trial court abused its discretion.” Id.
Thus, if you are the lawyer, you should not start a high-net-worth property case assuming an equal split.
Valuation Is Often The Real Fight
In a high-net-worth divorce, the hardest fight is usually how much an asset is worth.
Illinois law requires valuation before division. In In re Marriage of Schneider, the Illinois Supreme Court stated that “[i]n order to divide the marital property in just proportions, the circuit court first must establish the value of the assets.” 214 Ill. 2d 152, 171 (2005). It also recognized that “[a]ny conflicts in testimony concerning the valuation of assets must be resolved by the trier of fact.” Id.
The court has discretion over the valuation date. It may use “the date of the trial or such other date as agreed upon by the parties, or ordered by the court within its discretion.” 750 ILCS 5/503(f). The statute further states that the court “shall employ a fair market value standard.” 750 ILCS 5/503(k).
That valuation date can matter greatly when the estate includes real estate, a business, private investments, or other assets whose value changes quickly. Under Illinois law, stock options, restricted stock, or related benefits granted during the marriage are presumed marital “whether vested or non-vested or whether their value is ascertainable.” 750 ILCS 5/503(b)(3). The statute also recognizes that “the value of the stock options and restricted stock or similar form of benefit may not be then determinable” and that the actual division may occur later. 750 ILCS 5/503(b)(3).
Business valuation causes its own problems. In Schneider, the Illinois Supreme Court warned against double counting personal goodwill and quoted Zells for the rule that “[g]oodwill represents merely the ability to acquire future income” and that treating goodwill as a divisible marital asset can create “gross inequity.” Schneider, 214 Ill. 2d at 166. Yet, the court distinguished accounts receivable, reasoning that they are “assets that have been earned and have a known value” and thus may be considered in valuing a business. Id. at 170-71.
If you are a high-net-worth divorce lawyer, treat valuation as evidence. You must have the right date, records, expert, and distinction between divisible assets, future income, personal goodwill, enterprise value, debt, taxes, and liquidity.
A High-Net-Worth Settlement Has To Actually Work
When settlement is possible, high-net-worth divorces should be settled. Yet, the settlement has to be built to work.
Illinois law encourages settlement, stating that “[t]o promote amicable settlement of disputes” in a divorce, the parties may enter into an agreement regarding property, maintenance, support, parental responsibility allocation, and related issues. 750 ILCS 5/502(a). Additionally, the terms of the agreement, except terms that involve child support and parental responsibilities, are binding on the court unless the court finds the agreement unconscionable. 750 ILCS 5/502(b).
A high-net-worth settlement needs to do more than list who receives which asset. It must be precise. A settlement that seems fair on paper may fail if a party cannot truly transfer, refinance, sell, or pay as promised.
Once settlement terms are incorporated into the judgment, Illinois law states that they are “enforceable by all remedies available for enforcement of a judgment, including contempt,” and are also “enforceable as contract terms.” 750 ILCS 5/502(e). Property provisions are “never modifiable,” and maintenance may be made non-modifiable if the agreement says so. 750 ILCS 5/502(f).
Therefore, a high-net-worth divorce lawyer must draft settlement terms with enforcement in mind. The question is not simply whether the agreement sounds fair. The question is actually whether the agreement can be enforced, performed, and understood years later.
The Law Office of Russell D. Knight represents clients in Illinois divorce and family law matters, including cases involving property division, maintenance, child support, discovery, settlement agreements, and complex financial issues. High-net-worth divorce cases require careful attention to the Illinois Marriage and Dissolution of Marriage Act, financial records, valuation evidence, and the practical details needed to make a final judgment enforceable.
CASES, STATUTES, AND OTHER SOURCES REFERENCED IN THE HOW A DIVORCE LAWYER SHOULD REPRESENT A HIGH-NET-WORTH INDIVIDUAL IN ILLINOIS ARTICLE
750 ILCS 5/501 — Temporary Relief And Financial Affidavits
750 ILCS 5/502 — Agreements In An Illinois Divorce
750 ILCS 5/503 — Disposition Of Property And Debts In An Illinois Divorce
750 ILCS 5/504 — Maintenance In An Illinois Divorce
750 ILCS 5/505 — Child Support In An Illinois Divorce
Illinois Supreme Court Rule 201 — General Discovery Provisions
Dufour v. Mobil Oil Corp., 301 Ill. App. 3d 156 (1998)
In re Marriage of A’Hearn, 408 Ill. App. 3d 1091 (2011)
In re Marriage of Brill, 2017 IL App (2d) 160604
In re Marriage of Culp, 341 Ill. App. 3d 390 (2003)
In re Marriage of Daniels, 240 Ill. App. 3d 314 (1992)
In re Marriage of Heroy, 2017 IL 120205
In re Marriage of Micheli, 2014 IL App (2d) 121245
In re Marriage of Schneider, 214 Ill. 2d 152 (2005)
In re Marriage of Zells, 143 Ill. 2d 251 (1991)
In re Marriage of Zweig, 343 Ill. App. 3d 590 (2003)
Frequently Asked Questions About High-Net-Worth Divorce In Illinois
What Makes A Divorce High-Net-Worth In Illinois? A high-net-worth divorce often involves complex income, substantial assets, real estate, investments, trusts, businesses, and/or other financial issues that are going to need more than ordinary divorce paperwork.
Are Assets Automatically Divided 50/50 In A High-Net-Worth Illinois Divorce? No, marital property in Illinois is divided in “just proportions,” not necessarily equal proportions. 750 ILCS 5/503(d). The court assigns each spouse’s non-marital property to that spouse and then divides the marital estate after it considers the statutory factors.
How Is Child Support Determined When The Parents Are Wealthy? Illinois child support starts with the income-shares model. 750 ILCS 5/505(a)(1.5). If the parents’ combined adjusted net income exceeds the highest level of the child support schedule, then a court may use its discretion to determine child support. 750 ILCS 5/505(a)(3.5). The highest scheduled amount is not ignored but is also not automatically the final number. The court can consider the child’s needs, the child’s standard of living, reasonable child-related expenses, and the parents’ financial resources.
Does The Maintenance Formula Apply In A High-Income Illinois Divorce? Not in every case. It applies if the parties’ combined gross annual income is less than $500,000 and the payor has no prior child support or maintenance obligation, unless the court finds the guidelines inappropriate. 750 ILCS 5/504(b-1)(1). In higher-income cases, any non-guidelines maintenance award needs to be based on the statutory maintenance factors. 750 ILCS 5/504(b-1)(2).
Why Is Valuation So Important In A High-Net-Worth Divorce? Valuation is usually the center of a high-net-worth divorce, as the court cannot divide property fairly without knowing what the property is worth. Business interests, real estate, private investments, trusts, stock options, and restricted stock often require expert analysis.
