In re Marriage of Royer

Summary

Case Summary: In re Marriage of Royer - A single appellate reversal has exposed how digital breadcrumbs—fitness trackers, 3 AM social media posts, and co-parenting app logs—can demolish or defend parenting modification claims in Illinois courts. The Royer decision establishes that parents seeking custody changes must now bring ironclad documentation addressing every guardian ad litem concern, while those defending existing plans can weaponize opponents' digital footprints and evidentiary gaps to preserve hard-won protections.

The opposing counsel is already on the back foot. When the Second District Appellate Court handed down In re Marriage of Royer in December 2024, it sent a clear message to every family law practitioner in Illinois: modification motions require more than wishful thinking and optimistic projections. They require evidence. They require strategy. And they require an understanding that appellate courts are watching.

Your opposition just blinked—and if you're navigating a parenting plan modification in Illinois, this case is your new playbook.

The Strategic Breakdown: What Happened in Royer

The judge already knows that parenting plan modifications aren't granted on a whim. In Royer, the trial court apparently forgot this fundamental principle. Here's the tactical landscape:

Gresha and Brock Royer's marriage dissolved with an agreed parenting plan in February 2020. That plan designated Gresha as the primary caregiver and imposed significant restrictions on Brock's parenting time—restrictions that existed for documented reasons related to his medical and behavioral concerns. The guardian ad litem had raised serious flags. The original restrictions weren't arbitrary; they were protective measures based on evidence.

Brock subsequently filed multiple motions to lift those restrictions, claiming his health had substantially improved. The trial court granted overnight parenting time in January 2024.

The problem? The appellate court found no solid evidence of changed circumstances warranting the modification. The GAL's concerns remained unaddressed. The trial court's decision was reversed as against the manifest weight of the evidence.

This is what happens when motion practice outpaces proof.

The Legal Framework You Cannot Ignore

Illinois law establishes clear standards for modifying parenting plans under Section 610.5 of the Illinois Marriage and Dissolution of Marriage Act. The threshold question is whether the modification qualifies as a "minor modification" or requires the heightened showing of a substantial change in circumstances.

The Royer court's analysis confirms what sophisticated practitioners already know: courts must rigorously evaluate whether any proposed change serves the child's best interests, and the burden of proof rests squarely on the party seeking modification.

Key strategic takeaways:


Documentation is non-negotiable. Brock's claims of improved health lacked the evidentiary foundation necessary to overcome the original restrictions. Medical records, treatment compliance documentation, and expert testimony aren't optional—they're mandatory.

GAL recommendations carry weight. When your guardian ad litem raises ongoing concerns, those concerns don't evaporate because you file a motion. Address them directly or watch your modification request fail.

Agreed orders create strong precedent. The original parenting plan was agreed upon by both parties. Unwinding that agreement requires more than assertions of improvement—it requires proof that the circumstances justifying those restrictions have materially changed.


The Tech-Law Intersection: Discovery Leverage You're Missing

Here's where most family law practitioners leave money on the table. In cases involving behavioral or medical concerns—like Royer—digital evidence becomes your force multiplier.

Consider the discovery opportunities:


Fitness tracker and health app data can corroborate or contradict claims of medical improvement. Sleep patterns, activity levels, medication reminders—all discoverable, all admissible with proper foundation.

Social media activity often tells a different story than motion papers. A parent claiming stability while posting erratic content at 3 AM creates impeachment opportunities.

Communication patterns through text messages, emails, and co-parenting apps establish behavioral baselines. Consistent, appropriate communication supports modification requests. Hostile, erratic messaging undermines them.


Cyber negligence isn't just a data breach issue—it's family law leverage. When opposing counsel fails to preserve digital evidence or produces incomplete records, that failure becomes your advantage in discovery disputes.

Defending Against Modification Motions: The Royer Blueprint

If you represent the parent defending an existing parenting plan, Royer provides your strategic framework:

First, demand specificity. Force the moving party to articulate exactly what has changed and provide documentary support for each claimed improvement. Vague assertions of "doing better" don't meet the evidentiary standard.

Second, leverage your GAL relationship. If the guardian ad litem shares your concerns, ensure those concerns are thoroughly documented and presented to the court. The Royer appellate court specifically noted that the GAL's ongoing concerns remained unaddressed—that failure was fatal to the modification.

Third, establish the burden of proof early. In your responsive pleadings and at every court appearance, remind the court that the moving party bears the burden. They must prove changed circumstances. They must prove best interests. Make them carry that weight.

Pursuing Modification: What Royer Teaches About Winning

If you represent the parent seeking modification, Royer is a cautionary tale—but also a roadmap for doing it right.

Build your evidentiary foundation before filing. Gather medical records, treatment documentation, therapist reports, and any other evidence supporting your claimed improvements. If you can't document it, you can't prove it.

Address GAL concerns proactively. If the guardian ad litem has historically raised issues, demonstrate how those specific issues have been resolved. Generic claims of improvement aren't sufficient. Targeted evidence addressing each concern is required.

Consider timing strategically. Multiple modification motions—like Brock filed—can signal desperation rather than genuine changed circumstances. One well-prepared motion with comprehensive evidence is more effective than repeated attempts that erode judicial patience.

The Appellate Reality Check

The Second District's reversal in Royer reinforces a fundamental truth: trial court decisions in parenting matters are subject to meaningful appellate review. The "manifest weight of the evidence" standard provides real protection against erroneous modifications.

For practitioners, this means:


Create your appellate record at trial. Every objection, every exhibit, every offer of proof matters. If you're defending against an improper modification, preserve your issues for appeal.

Understand the standard of review. "Manifest weight of the evidence" means the opposite conclusion is clearly evident. That's a meaningful standard, and Royer demonstrates that appellate courts will apply it.

Appellate relief is available. When trial courts err, reversal is possible. The Royer court didn't remand for further proceedings—it reversed outright and reinstated the original parenting plan.


The Power Dynamic Shift

Cases like Royer shift power dynamics in family law litigation. The parent who maintained the original restrictions—who documented concerns, who worked with the GAL, who built the evidentiary record—ultimately prevailed. The parent who filed multiple motions without adequate evidentiary support lost not just at trial, but on appeal.

This is the reality of high-stakes family law practice. Modification motions aren't paperwork exercises. They're strategic operations requiring evidence, timing, and sophisticated understanding of both trial and appellate standards.

Your Next Move

Whether you're defending an existing parenting plan or pursuing modification, the Royer decision demands strategic precision. The margin for error is narrow. The evidentiary requirements are real. And the appellate courts are paying attention.

If you're facing a parenting plan modification dispute in Illinois, you need counsel who understands both the legal framework and the tactical realities. The opposition is already preparing their next move. The question is whether you're prepared to counter it.

Book a consultation now. Your parenting plan—and your client's relationship with their child—depends on getting this right.

Full Opinion (PDF): Download the full opinion

Written by Jonathan D. Steele

Chicago divorce attorney with cybersecurity certifications (Security+, CEH, ISC2). Illinois Super Lawyers Rising Star 2016-2025.

Free Consultation

For more insights, read our Divorce Decoded blog.