Logourl black
From our private database of 14,100+ case briefs...

In re Marriage of Logston

Illinois Supreme Court
469 N.E.2d 167 (1984)


Facts

Kate Logston (plaintiff) initiated contempt proceedings against her former husband Eugene Logston (defendant) for failing to comply with the dissolution-of-marriage judgment. The judgment was entered in January 1981 and, after dividing the assets, ordered Eugene to pay $221.50 per month to Kate. Kate was granted ownership of the martial home and was ordered to pay Eugene $16,887 for his interest in the home. At the time of judgment, Eugene was receiving $813.32 per month in payments from social security, pension, and disability insurance. Eugene failed to make the required payments, and Kate petitioned the court to find Eugene in contempt. In May 1983, the trial court held a hearing on the petition. At the time of the hearing, Eugene’s income had increased to $922.44. Eugene spent the majority of the money paid by Kate for the marital home on a trip to California. He also claimed monthly expenses for installment loans for an automobile, a recreational vehicle, and a loan obtained to remodel his new wife’s kitchen. The testimony at the hearing was unclear as to whether Eugene’s new wife shared payments on any of these debts. The trial court entered an order that Eugene owed $4,707.60 in arrearage. The trial court ordered Eugene to either pay $4,043.10 within 30 days or serve a jail sentence of not more than six months. Eugene appealed to the Illinois Supreme Court.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Ryan, C.J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A "yes" or "no" answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 221,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,100 briefs, keyed to 189 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.