In re Parentage of Rogan M., 19 N.E.3d 140

Parents Keisha M. and John M. share a son born in 2006; after separation they had a parenting arrangement with active involvement from both.
Keisha petitioned in 2011 to remove the child from Illinois to California due to an employment change.
The circuit court denied the removal in a July 31, 2013 memorandum, holding Keisha failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence that removal was in the child’s best interests.
Keisha appealed, arguing the trial court applied the wrong evidentiary standard and that the best-interest finding was against the manifest weight of the evidence.
The appellate court considered whether a removal petition is a custody modification subject to the clear and convincing standard under section 610 of the Illinois Marriage and Dissolution of Marriage Act.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Proper evidentiary standard for removal under Marriage Act	Keisha: preponderance of evidence applies because section 609 is silent on quantum	John: removal is a custody modification under §610, so clear and convincing applies	Removal is not a custody modification under §610; preponderance standard applies; trial court erred by using clear and convincing

In re D.T., 212 Ill. 2d 347 (2004) (civil cases generally use preponderance unless statute requires higher standard)
In re Enis, 121 Ill. 2d 124 (1988) (application of incorrect evidentiary standard is reversible error)
In re Marriage of Wechselberger, 115 Ill. App. 3d 779 (1983) (legislature can impose heightened standard by statute)
In re Marriage of Bednar, 146 Ill. App. 3d 704 (1986) (removal affects custodial rights but is not a custody modification under §610)
In re Marriage of Mueller, 76 Ill. App. 3d 860 (1979) (order addressing removal and visitation is not a custody modification)