In re Marriage of Lisk

• Decision Date: 26 March 2021
• Docket Number: NO. 4-20-0031,4-20-0031
• Citation: 2021 IL App (4th) 200031 -U
• Parties: In re MARRIAGE OF TAMMY L. LISK, Petitioner-Appellee, and DALE W. LISK, Respondent-Appellant (Ronald Perrine, Intervenor-Appellee).
• Court: United States Appellate Court of Illinois

2021 IL App (4th) 200031-U

In re MARRIAGE OF TAMMY L. LISK, Petitioner-Appellee, and DALE W. LISK, Respondent-Appellant (Ronald Perrine, Intervenor-Appellee).

NO. 4-20-0031

APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FOURTH DISTRICT

March 26, 2021

NOTICE

This Order was filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and is not precedent except in the limited circumstances allowed under Rule 23(e)(1).

Appeal from the Circuit Court of Schuyler County

No. 14D14

Honorable Jerry J. Hooker, Judge Presiding.

JUSTICE STEIGMANNdelivered the judgment of the court.

Justice Holder White concurred in the judgment.

Justice Turner dissented.

ORDER

¶ 1Held:The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment because that court did not err in its distribution of the marital assets or granting a judgment in favor of Ronald Perrine.

¶ 2 In October 2014, petitionerTammy L. Lisk filed a petition for dissolution of marriage against respondentDale W. Lisk.In December 2015, the trial court found that grounds existed for dissolution of marriage.

¶ 3 In April 2019, Ronald Perrine sought to intervene in the dissolution proceedings by filing a "Complaint for Interpleader and Declaratory Relief," citing section 2-409 of the Code of Civil Procedure(735 ILCS 5/2-409(West 2018)).Perrine alleged that he incurred costs associated with caring for cattle that Dale had abandoned on Perrine's property.Perrine sought a judgment against Dale in the amount of $34,406, to be paid from a portion of the proceeds awarded to Dale from the dissolution proceedings.

¶ 4 In October 2019, the trial court conducted a hearing at which Dale failed to personally appear.The court relied on evidence from previous hearings and found that the marital property was worth $614,285.67.The court also concluded that Dale had dissipated the value of the marital property by letting the marital residence fall into disrepair and not making the mortgage payments.The court divided the marital property in half, awarding Dale the value of the marital residence, the appraised equipment and livestock that had not been sold, the value of the cattle Dale sold, and the attorney fees awarded as the result of multiple contempt findings.Tammy was awarded the money from a property auction, her investment accounts, and money being held by the Carthage Livestock company.The court awarded her a judgment of $107,718.67 as an equalizing payment.

¶ 5The trial court also determined that Perrine, "an intervening party," was owed $20,408 from the marital estate and directed that any remaining equipment located at Perrine's property be sold and the proceeds divided equally between Perrine and Tammy until the debt to Perrine was satisfied.Thereafter, the proceeds from the equipment sale would be awarded to Tammy until the equalizing payment judgment was satisfied.

¶ 6 Dale appeals, arguing the trial court erred by (1) incorrectly calculating the marital property value because the trial court's calculation did not include debts and other obligations, (2) failing to set a date for the purposes of determining the value of marital assets, (3) incorrectly applying the law regarding dissipation, (4) failing to equitably distribute marital assets, (5) incorrectly relying upon the requests to admit, and (6) incorrectly granting a judgment in favor of Perrine.We disagree and affirm.

¶ 7 I. BACKGROUND

¶ 8 In October 2014, Tammy filed a petition for dissolution of marriage against Dale.In January 2015, the trial court ordered, in part, that Dale comply with discovery procedures and provide discovery responses.In February 2015, the court found Dale in indirect civil contempt for failing to comply with the court's January order and sentenced Dale to an indeterminate period of incarceration in jail until he complied.However, Dale purged his contempt prior to the start of that sentence.

¶ 9 In December 2015, the trial court found that grounds existed for dissolution of marriage.In July 2016, Tammy filed a motion for temporary relief, asking the trial court to order Dale to continue to pay the mortgage of the marital residence that he had stopped paying.In August 2016, the court granted that motion.

¶ 10 At a hearing on November 3, 2016, the trial court began by noting that Dale's attorney was moving to withdraw from the case.The court said, "I would state for the record that when this case began, [Dale] had Mr. Lane.Mr. Lane had to withdraw because of noncompliance from [Dale].He then had Mr. Tucker.Mr. Tucker had to withdraw, then he had Mr. Leonard.Mr. Leonard had to withdraw."The court concluded that Dale was attempting to delay the proceedings and denied the motion to withdraw.

¶ 11The trial court then addressed Tammy's fourth motion to compel discovery.The court questioned Dale's counsel, who confirmed counsel had (1) received interrogatories and (2) sent those interrogatories to Dale.Dale had not responded to the interrogatories.The court asked Dale why he had not responded, and Dale began to describe health problems.The court asked him why his health problems prevented him from answering questions and noted he was able to be present in the courtroom.Dale then said the interrogatories "can't be completely answered," describing various problems he had with equipment sales, taxes he needed to pay, andthe mortgage.

¶ 12The trial court held Dale in indirect civil contempt and ordered him to "comply in total" with the discovery.The court then set sentencing for November 14, 2016, and stated, "I am going to give [Dale] an opportunity to purge before[ ]he's actually sitting in jail[.]"

¶ 13 On November 14, 2016, the trial court conducted Dale's sentencing hearing.Dale provided handwritten responses to many of the interrogatories, but upon review, Tammy's counsel noted that his responses were inadequate.The court noted that it "couldn't have been any more clear" about what Dale had to do, and Dale had still not complied with the court's order.The court said, "Everything was supposed to be redone and you didn't do it."Dale replied, "Okay.My doctor has indicated that I should be given more time because of my health problems.I was resubmitted to the hospital—"The court interrupted Dale and sentenced him to jail for an indeterminate period until he complied with discovery.One week later, by agreement, Dale's contempt was purged, and he was released from jail.(We note that in December 2016, Dale's parents sued Dale and Tammy but the trial court in that case stayed the proceedings pending resolution of this case.This court affirmed that court's decision in Lisk v. Lisk, 2020 IL App (4th) 190364, 143 N.E.3d 1240.)

¶ 14 In February 2017, Tammy filed a petition for indirect civil contempt in which she alleged that Dale was not making payments on the marital residence.In March 2017, the trial court ordered Tammy to make reasonable efforts to make the marital residence ready for sale.In May 2017, the court ordered Dale to (1) vacate the marital residence, (2) provide records of all cattle sales, and (3) disclose the location of any unsold cattle and farm machinery.

¶ 15 In September 2017, Tammy moved for the trial court to find Dale in indirect civil contempt.At a hearing on that motion in October 2017, the court took evidence that the marital residence was in great disrepair and filth due to Dale's neglect and that he had failed to leave theresidence.Tammy testified that when she went to the house in April 2017 to retrieve personal items, she saw that there was trash everywhere and visible rat feces.When she opened a drawer, a mouse came out.The refrigerator and toilet were full of mold.She saw moldy food on a desk in the bedroom.Tammy described the odor as "overwhelming.It was hard to breathe."The court also noted that because Dale failed to pay the mortgage as ordered, a foreclosure action had been filed against the parties.The court ordered Dale to "clean the mess, the food, [and] the feces."

¶ 16 In December 2017, the trial court found Dale in contempt and ordered that Dale had until January 8, 2018, to clean the marital residence or else he would go to jail that day.On January 8, 2018, the court found Dale remained in contempt and ordered Dale into the custody of the Schuyler County Sheriff but directed that Dale be allowed to leave during the day to clean the marital residence.

¶ 17 In April 2018, Tammy filed a notice of intent to claim dissipation in which she claimed that Dale had (1) sold cattle on multiple occasions, (2) failed to pay the mortgage for the marital residence which resulted in foreclosure, and (3)"disposed" of various farming equipment, vehicles, and other property.

¶ 18 In May 2018, Dale purged his contempt and was released from jail.Later that month, Tammy served upon Dale a request to admit facts.That same month, the trial court found that Dale had failed to respond to the request to admit facts in a timely manner and the items in the request to admit were deemed admitted.As a result, Dale was deemed to have admitted, among other things, that the residence was valued at $100,000 and the following documents attached to the requests were accurate: (1) an appraisal of personal property, (2) exhibits of the sales of cattle at various locations, and (3) a list of property that had been sold after the filing of the petition for dissolution of marriage.The court later granted the parties a dissolution of marriage and orderedthe sale of the items contained in the property appraisal.

¶ 19 In August 2018, Tammy filed a third notice of intent to claim dissipation in which she alleged that Dale had disposed of marital farm personal property that had been appraised by auctioneers.The notice identified multiple items of personal property and their respective appraised value.

¶ 20 In January 2019, the trial court ordered that by January 28, 2019, Dale must provide Tammy's counsel with a list of equipment and livestock that he claimed he had transferred to his parents.Dale failed to follow this order,...