Rafferty-Plunkett v. Plunkett

State: Illinois

Court: 3rd District Appellate

Docket No: 3-08-0659 Rel

Case Date: 06/11/2009

Preview:3--08--0659 ______________________________________________________________________________ Filed June 11, 2009 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS THIRD DISTRICT A.D., 2009 MARIE RAFFERTY-PLUNKETT, ) Appeal from the Circuit Court ) of the 12th Judicial Circuit Petitioner-Appellant, ) Will County, Illinois ) v. ) No. 97 D 15706 ) PATRICK K. PLUNKETT, ) ) Defendant ) ) and ) ) State Universities Retirement System of ) Illinois, ) ) Honorable Respondent-Appellee. ) Robert Lorz, ) Judge, Presiding ______________________________________________________________________________ PRESIDING JUSTICE O'BRIEN delivered the opinion of the court: ______________________________________________________________________________ The trial court granted respondent State Universities Retirement System's motion to dismiss petitioner Marie Rafferty-Plunkett's citation to discover assets and denied her motion for turnover of pension fund assets that were awarded to Marie in the dissolution of her marriage to Patrick. The trial court found that in the absence of a qualified Illinois domestic relations order (QILDRO) consent executed by Patrick, the trial court had no statutory authority to order the State Universities Retirement System to turn over pension benefits. Marie appeals the trial court's ruling. We reverse the trial court and remand.

FACTS On September 15, 1998, the trial court entered a judgment order dissolving the marriage of Marie Rafferty-Plunkett and Patrick Plunkett. As part of the dissolution order, the trial court approved as fair, just and equitable, an oral settlement agreement, noting the parties had entered into the agreement "freely, voluntarily without force, coercion or duress," with full knowledge and full and complete disclosure. As part of the settlement agreement incorporated into the dissolution judgment, Marie was awarded 50% of Patrick's pension plan benefits acquired during the marriage. The judgment provided, in part: "As the Defendant is currently receiving his pension, it is the agreement of the parties that the Defendant shall pay Plaintiff one-half (

Download Rafferty-Plunkett v. Plunkett.pdf