In re Parentage of K.E.B.
14 N.E.3d 1259
Ill. App. Ct.2014Background
- Christine challenged a visitation order that required time and place to be agreed by both parents, effectively restricting her access pending mutual agreement.
- The case arose under the Illinois Parentage Act with Thomas alleging priority and seeking custody; the trial court granted joint custody with Thomas residential custody.
- The GAL had previously recommended Christine as primary caregiver with liberal visitation, but concerns about Christine’s alcohol use led to restrictions.
- A November 22, 2013 order allowed supervised visitation only if both parents were present, and by January 2014 the court imposed supervision, a BAIID device, and treatment obligations.
- The appellate court held the agreement-to-time-and-place requirement abused discretion given the parties’ tumultuous history and remanded for a specific scheduled visitation arrangement.
- The decision remands for a structured schedule unless the parties otherwise agree.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether requiring mutual agreement on visitation timing constitutes an improper restriction | Thomas (plaintiff) | Christine argues it denies visitation | Yes, it abuses discretion; reversed. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Marriage of LaTour, 241 Ill. App. 3d 500 (1993) (structured visitation required when parties cannot agree; error if no serious-endangerment finding)
- In re Marriage of Campbell, 261 Ill. App. 3d 483 (1993) (public policy favors parent-child relationship; visitation only restricted to prevent serious endangerment)
- In re Marriage of Ross, 355 Ill. App. 3d 1162 (2005) (abuse of discretion standard for visitation restrictions; serious-endangerment standard)
- In re Marriage of Chehaiber, 394 Ill. App. 3d 690 (2009) (distinguishes purpose of restriction from mere change in visitation schedule)
- In re Marriage of Anderson, 130 Ill. App. 3d 684 (1985) (sets forth standards for modification of visitation)