In re Custody of G.L.
2017 IL App (1st) 163171
Ill. App. Ct.2017Background
- Parents Sarah Finn (formerly Czerwinski) and Matthew L. share one child, G.L. (b. 2010). They separated in late 2012; Sarah relocated to Champaign County in 2013 and later to Philo, IL, and enrolled G.L. in school there.
- Matthew filed a parentage/allocation petition in Cook County (2013), obtained temporary orders, and later sought all parental responsibilities and majority parenting time; Sarah filed a counterpetition seeking majority parenting time and designation of Champaign County as the child’s primary residence.
- The trial court held an evidentiary hearing (Oct. 2016). An independent evaluator and the guardian ad litem recommended joint decision-making and that the parents live closer together; they noted emotional stress to the child from moves and separation anxiety.
- The court awarded Matthew majority parental decision-making authority and parenting time, designated Matthew the residential parent, ordered Sarah to return to the Chicago area (within 25 miles of Matthew), and restricted Sarah’s regular parenting time to within a one-hour drive of Matthew’s home (with longer visits allowed in Champaign County).
- Sarah appealed, challenging the court’s consideration of statutory factors, admission of school-quality testimony, and the one-hour/relocation restrictions; the appellate court affirmed in part, vacated in part, and remanded.
Issues
| Issue | Sarah's Argument | Matthew's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Sarah’s counterpetition constituted a proper relocation petition | Counterpetition and pleadings sufficed to request relocation and designation of Champaign residence | Sarah never filed the statutorily required relocation notice/petition and waived relocation argument | Waived; counterpetition did not meet statutory relocation filing requirements |
| Whether court could restrict parenting time to within a one-hour drive and order Sarah to return to Chicago without specific finding | Restriction/relocation requires a compelling reason; court lacked statutory findings | Distance is not in child’s best interest; restriction appropriate | Vacated restriction/remanded: court failed to make required preponderance finding that out-of-area parenting would seriously endanger child’s physical/mental/moral/emotional health |
| Admissibility/relevance of testimony about comparative school quality | Such testimony was speculative and irrelevant | School quality is a relevant factor to child’s best interests | Admissible; child was school-aged and school quality is a relevant best-interests factor |
| Whether trial court considered required statutory factors in allocating parenting time and decision-making | Court failed to expressly address all statutory factors (caretaking time, child adjustment) | Trial court is presumed to have considered statutory factors; findings not against manifest weight | Affirmed: court’s allocation not against manifest weight; presumption that court considered factors applies; credibility findings binding |
Key Cases Cited
- Foutch v. O’Bryant, 99 Ill. 2d 389 (1984) (appellant bears burden to present sufficiently complete record on appeal)
- Callis, Papa, Jackstadt & Halloran, P.C. v. Norfolk & Western Ry. Co., 195 Ill. 2d 356 (2001) (proponent of evidence has duty to file exhibits with trial court)
- In re Marriage of Sussenbach, 108 Ill. 2d 489 (1985) (trial court best positioned to judge witness credibility in custody matters)
- In re Marriage of Bates, 212 Ill. 2d 489 (2004) (appellate review defers to permissible inferences by trial court in custody cases)
- In re Marriage of Samardzija, 365 Ill. App. 3d 702 (2006) (pre-2016 precedent recognizing custodial parent’s freedom to relocate within Illinois)
- In re Marriage of Arcaute, 261 Ill. App. 3d 263 (1994) (school-quality evidence may be irrelevant for very young children)
- In re Marriage of Diehl, 221 Ill. App. 3d 410 (1991) (trial court need not make explicit finding on each statutory factor; presumption it considered them)
- Daniels v. Anderson, 162 Ill. 2d 47 (1994) (issues not raised in trial court are forfeited on appeal)
- In re Marriage of Taylor, 251 Ill. App. 3d 58 (1993) (school quality can be a relevant custody factor)