In the Onishi-Chong case just reported on, the wife had filed a §2-1401 action. It alleged fraud on the part of the husband. She alleged he tried to conceal his income during their divorce case.
The husband had filed a motion for summary judgment. The trial court had granted his motion. The trial court considered the wife’s previously submitted pretrial memorandum to the court. She had argued essentially the same points that she had raised in her §2-1401 petition later (that I last reported on).
On appeal, the wife argued the trial court’s reliance on her pretrial memorandum was in violation of Illinois Rule of Evidence 408(a). The appellate court disagreed.
Ill.R.Evid. 408(a) states that such “settlement” offers are inadmissible only when they are offered “to prove liability for, invalidity of, or amount of a claim that was disputed as to validity or amount, or to impeach through a prior inconsistent statement or contradiction.”
The memorandum was not offered to prove liability for or invalidity of a claim. It did not involve a prior inconsistent statement. Therefore, the trial court’s consideration of it was permissible.
The court considered the memorandum to show the wife had knowledge of facts supporting her claims and failed to diligently pursue those claims prior to judgment.
In re Marriage of Onishi-Chong, 2020 IL App (2d) 180824 (February 20, 2020) Du Page Co.
Share This Story, Choose Your Platform!
