In re Parentage of A.G.

In re Parentage of A.G., 2024 IL App (3d) 240003-U (Ill. App. Ct. May 31, 2024)
- Parties: Stephen Guzman (petitioner/counter‑respondent/appellee) v. Breanne Selin (respondent/ counterpetitioner/appellant).
- Note: Rule 23 order — non‑precedential except as allowed by Rule 23(e)(1).

Key legal issues
- Whether the trial court’s award of joint parental decision‑making for major issues and 50/50 parenting time was against the manifest weight of the evidence.
- Whether the appellate court had jurisdiction to consider appellant’s remaining claims on appeal.

Holding / outcome
- The appellate court affirmed the trial court’s allocation of parental responsibilities: joint decision‑making and equal (50/50) parenting time.
- The court declined to address Breanne’s other appellate claims for lack of jurisdiction.

Significant legal reasoning (concise)
- Standard of review: allocation-of-parental-responsibility and parenting‑time determinations will not be overturned unless against the manifest weight of the evidence.
- The guardian ad litem (GAL) — whose investigation, home visits, and interviews the trial court relied upon — recommended joint decision‑making and a 50/50 parenting schedule. The GAL observed that the parties historically cooperated on medical, educational, and childcare matters, successfully reached agreements on holidays and extra time, and had maintained an equal rotation since August 2020.
- The GAL also recounted episodes where the mother initially agreed to joint arrangements but later “backed out,” and expressed concern about third‑party (maternal parents’) influence. The GAL concluded the child benefitted from substantial time in both homes and that joint decision‑making was in the child’s best interests.
- The appellate court reviewed the extensive record (over 4,000 pages), found the trial court’s factual findings supported by the evidence (parents’ demonstrated ability to cooperate and established parenting pattern), and held the court’s allocation was not against the manifest weight of the evidence.
- The court declined to reach other appellate arguments for lack of jurisdiction (the opinion does not disturb the allocation ruling but does not resolve additional issues raised).

Practice implications
- GAL reports and corroborated testimony about parents’ cooperative practices carry heavy weight in allocation disputes; litigants should develop and document consistent, cooperative decision‑making and parenting schedules (or, conversely, document dysfunction if seeking sole decision‑making).
- Preserve the record: detailed trial evidence, schedules, communications, and witness testimony on routine joint decisions are critical.
- Appellate practice: comply strictly with Rule 341 briefing requirements and ensure appeals are taken from final, appealable orders — jurisdictional defects will result in unaddressed claims.
- Counsel should anticipate courts favoring shared parenting where evidence shows parents can cooperate and the child benefits from significant time with both parents.