In re Marriage of Piegari
2016 IL App (2d) 160594
| Ill. App. Ct. | 2017Background
- Karyn and Alexander Piegari married in 2011 and have three young children (ages 4 and two 2-year-old twins). Divorce proceedings were pending when the dispute arose.
- An agreed parenting plan (March 2016) gave Karyn majority parenting time but Karyn and Alexander equal decision-making for significant matters (including school and extracurricular enrollment).
- In June 2016 Karyn petitioned under 735 ILCS 5/21-101 to hyphenate the children’s surnames to “Piegari-Crider,” citing her intent to resume her maiden name and cultural/administrative reasons.
- Alexander opposed, asserting the change was not in the children’s best interests and pointing out Karyn had already used the hyphenated name on at least one public document (a CaringBridge page for a hospitalized child).
- The trial court denied the name-change petition for lack of clear and convincing evidence and entered an injunction barring Karyn from hyphenating the children’s surnames on any official document (including school and medical records).
- Karyn appealed; the appellate court accepted interlocutory review under Ill. S. Ct. R. 307(a) and affirmed both the denial and the injunction.
Issues
| Issue | Piegari's Argument | Piegari's Opponent (Alexander) Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether hyphenating children’s surnames serves the children’s best interests under 735 ILCS 5/21-101 | Hyphenation would avoid confusion, reflect maternal heritage, pose little disruption to young children | Change not in children’s best interests; mother presented no evidence and had already used hyphenation publicly | Denied — trial court’s denial not against manifest weight; no clear and convincing evidence provided |
| Whether a custodial parent may be enjoined from unilaterally using an alternate surname for children in official records | Karyn implicitly claimed ability to refer to/enroll children under the hyphenated name given her majority parenting time | Alexander sought injunction to prevent Karyn from using hyphenated name on official documents, citing potential harm and prior unilateral use | Granted — injunction justified and narrowly tailored to bar use of hyphenated name in official records; consistent with Presson rule |
| Whether parenting time alone permits unilateral decision about children’s surnames | Karyn argued her primary physical custody meant she would enroll the children and thus control names used | Alexander emphasized equal decision-making authority per agreement; parenting time does not equate to decision-making authority | Court held parenting time ≠ sole decision-making; equal decision-making precludes unilateral name change |
| Whether the injunction was overbroad in the age of social media and extra-legal references | Karyn challenged scope implicitly by appeal; did not separately brief injunction issue | Alexander relied on CaringBridge example and sought prior restraint to protect official records | Court found injunction appropriately limited to official records and legal proceedings and not overbroad |
Key Cases Cited
- Presson v. Presson, 102 Ill. 2d 303 (Ill. 1984) (establishes that an order enjoining a custodial parent from changing a child’s name must be limited to legal proceedings and official records)
- In re A Minor, 127 Ill. 2d 247 (Ill. 1989) (discusses interlocutory appealability of injunctions affecting parties’ everyday activities)
- In re J.S., 267 Ill. App. 3d 145 (Ill. App. Ct. 1994) (addresses scope and limitations of injunctions concerning use of names in records)