The Illinois Appellate Court recently upheld a lower court's decision to dismiss a notice of intent to claim dissipation of marital assets in the case of Kristy Aggarwal v. Aman Aggarwal. The court ruled that Kristy Aggarwal did not file her notice within the required timeframe, which has significant implications for how marital assets are handled in divorce cases.

This ruling affects individuals going through divorce proceedings, particularly those who may wish to claim that their spouse has improperly used marital funds. It emphasizes the importance of adhering to procedural deadlines in family law cases.

Background

Kristy and Aman Aggarwal were married in 2012 and have one child. In 2023, Kristy filed for divorce, and Aman responded with a counterpetition. The case was set for trial on December 1, 2025, after the trial court issued an order on August 22, 2025.

On October 17, 2025, Kristy filed a notice of intent to claim dissipation of marital assets, alleging that Aman had made unauthorized withdrawals and transfers from their joint accounts. Kristy claimed these actions occurred between April 2023 and October 2025 and were for non-marital purposes. Aman contested this filing, arguing it was untimely according to the Illinois Marriage and Dissolution of Marriage Act.

The Ruling

The court ruled in favor of Aman, stating that Kristy's notice was not timely filed as required by section 503(d)(2)(i) of the Illinois Marriage and Dissolution of Marriage Act. This section mandates that a notice of intent to claim dissipation must be filed no later than 60 days before trial or 30 days after discovery closes, whichever is later.

Justice Navarro delivered the judgment, stating, "Kristy’s notice of intent to claim dissipation was therefore filed 56 days after discovery closed and 45 days before trial." The court affirmed the trial court's order, emphasizing that compliance with the notice requirements is mandatory.

Impact

This decision underscores the strict adherence to procedural rules in divorce cases, particularly regarding the timing of notices related to the dissipation of marital assets. It serves as a reminder for individuals involved in divorce proceedings to be vigilant about deadlines to ensure their claims are considered.

The ruling may influence future cases by reinforcing the importance of timely filings and could deter parties from attempting to claim dissipation if they fail to follow the established procedures. It highlights that even unintentional delays can have significant consequences in legal proceedings.

What's Next

Details were not available in the court filing regarding whether Kristy plans to appeal this decision. However, given the court's clear ruling on the procedural issues, any potential appeal would likely focus on the interpretation of the notice requirements under the Illinois Marriage and Dissolution of Marriage Act.