2012 IL App (3d) 120524
Ill. App. Ct.2012Background
- Grunstad and Cooper share two children, Olyvia (b. 1998) and Keegan (b. 2001).
- A 2003 Nevada order awarded joint custody with Neely Grunstad as primary custodian; later they moved to Illinois.
- In 2005, Neely and Cooper entered a support agreement incorporating a joint parenting plan giving Neely primary physical custody.
- In 2010 Cooper petitioned to modify custody, alleging multiple changed circumstances and seeking primary physical custody.
- In 2011 a hearing was held; Cooper sought an in camera interview of Olyvia, and Neely moved for directed verdict.
- The circuit court denied the in camera interview and granted Neely’s motion for a directed verdict; on appeal, the appellate court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| In camera interview of child tangent to custody, error? | Cooper argues denial violated evidentiary rights. | Neely argues child’s preference is but one factor; interview risks harm. | No abuse of discretion; denial affirmed. |
| Directed verdict proper after trial evidence? | Cooper contends prima facie case shown. | Neely contends evidence fails prima facie; weighs totality. | No error; directed verdict appropriate. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Marriage of Wanstreet, 364 Ill. App. 3d 729 (2006) (child’s preference not alone sufficient to modify custody; court discretion supported)
- People ex rel. Sherman v. Cryns, 203 Ill. 2d 264 (2003) (directed verdict standard; assess totality of evidence)