In a particularly bizarre alienation of affections case filed in Illinois, a wealthy automobile dealer is suing his estranged wife's lover for loss of her potential income –- even though he supported her during their marriage.

Ronda and Bob Rohrman in happier times

Illinois is one of only eight states that still recognizes the archaic tort of alienation of affections but in 1947, concerned the tort was being used as “an instrument for blackmail,” the Legislature limited a plaintiff's recovery to “the actual damages sustained as a result of the injury complained of.”

No damages can be awarded for “mental anguish suffered by plaintiff; any injury to plaintiff's feelings; shame, humiliation, sorrow or mortification suffered by plaintiff.”

Bob Rohrman, who operates 26 auto dealerships in Illinois and Indiana, filed an alienation of affections suit in Du Page County, Ill., last month, alleging a plastic surgeon caused the “irretrievable breakdown” of his marriage.

According to the complaint, the Rohrmans were married in December 2002 and “enjoyed a happy marriage” until April 2008, when Dr. Sami Bittar “initiated a romantic and sexual relationship” with Ronda Rohrman. During the affair, he allegedly bought her expensive gifts, had sex with her “on multiple occasions,” and contacted her by phone and e-mail to arrange “romantic rendezvous.”

Bob Rohrman filed for divorce in Indiana in June 2008. The alienation of affections lawsuit -- filed in the most reliably conservative county in Illinois -- seeks at least $50,000 in actual damages, “said damages includ[ing] ... Loss of Ronda's potential income as a wife.”

“It is with much regret that I was forced to exert my legal rights against the doctor, but his pursuit of my wife and alienation of her affection for me was more than I would tolerate,” Rohrman said in a statement.

But there appears to be no precedent for awarding loss of potential spousal income to a plaintiff in an alienation of affections case. And Bob Rohrman could hardly be less qualified to receive such an award.

The potential income concept is usually applied to determine child support in divorce cases, with courts taking into account the parent's recent work history, the parent's occupational qualifications and the prevailing job opportunities and salary levels in the community where the parent lives.

Rohrman, 76, met his wife –- who is 30 years his junior -- while she was working at his Toyota dealership in Westmont, Ill. But he says in his complaint that he “supported Ronda throughout the pendency of the marriage, providing for her a luxurious lifestyle” -- which strongly suggests Ronda Rohrman has no recent work history.

Even if she does have a potential income, moreover, it's not clear how the loss of it would damage her husband, whose Rohrman Auto Group dealerships have estimated sales of $23.7 million and who was wealthy enough to keep her in luxury.

The only other specific damages Rohrman is seeking are for amounts owed to “private investigator for services used to uncover infidelity of Ronda.”

Alienation of affections suits still occasionally pay out, with a jury in Hoke County, N.C., for example, awarding $500,000 in May against a woman for seducing a married man. But North Carolina allows recovery of compensatory and punitive damages for injury to the plaintiff's “health, feelings, or reputation.”

Before Bob Rohrman can even get to damages, he must show that Bittar instigated the relationship with his wife or enticed her affections away from him. In a recent case, an Illinois appeals court found no liability, citing evidence that the plaintiff's husband initiated the first physical encounter with the defendant. Orbeta v. Gomez, 733 N.E.2d 1287 (2000).

Bittar allegedly met the Rohrmans when a member of their family had plastic surgery in early 2008. He has offices in Cook County, Ill., but also practices in a Du Page County hospital.

By Matthew Heller
7/15/09