If you have ever opened up any kind of account with a financial institution, you will be asked to name a beneficiary. The beneficiary will be the person who will receive the account, if you pass away. If you are married, you will likely choose your spouse to be the beneficiary of that account. If you subsequently get divorced in Illinois, your ex-spouse’s beneficiary designation is not completely undone by an Illinois divorce. You may be awarded the entirety of an asset but your right to give away that asset remains…even to your ex-spouse. “Illinois case law pertaining to nontrust property assigned to one party after a divorce, where the ex-spouse is still named as the primary beneficiary, distinguishes two distinct types of interests. One interest is ownership interest, the ability to do with the property as one wishes. The second interest discussed is an expectancy or beneficial interest. Expectancy is defined as ‘the interest of a person who merely foresees that he might receive a future beneficence, such as the interest of an heir apparent… or of a beneficiary designated by a living insured who has a right to change the beneficiary.’ ” (Emphasis added.) Deida v. Murphy, 271 Ill. App. 3d 296, 299 (1995) (quoting In re Marriage of Weinstein, 128 Ill. App. 3d 234, 244 (1984)). If you really own something, you have the right to give it away to whomever you choose. Complete ownership of an asset means you can leave that asset to your ex-spouse through a beneficiary designation. “Because having the right to do whatever one wants with property includes the power to direct, “After I die, A shall become the owner,” there is no inconsistency between an ownership interest in one person and an expectancy interest in someone else. This power of after-death disposition is a stick in the brush pile of ownership. Being awarded property, such as an account, means gaining the ability to control who will be the new owner after one dies (and either changing one’s mind inter vivos or not changing one’s mind about the after-death beneficiary).” Mowen v. Kelly, 2025 IL App (4th) 240906 To illustrate, in one case, Robert E. Leahy owned some real estate on North Clark Street in Chicago. He put the property in a land trust, naming his wife, Margaret K. Leahy, as the contingent beneficiary in case he died. Robert and Margaret afterward […]
