In re Marriage of Weston

1. Case citation and parties
- In re Marriage of Weston, Nos. 5-23-1323, 5-24-0717 (consol.), 2025 IL App (5th) 231323-U (Aug. 8, 2025).
- Petitioner-Appellant: Brittani Weston; Respondent-Appellee: Chad Weston. (Circuit Ct., Williamson County, No. 22-DC-36, Judge Carey C. Gill). Note: Rule 23 order — nonprecedential except as permitted by Rule 23(e)(1).

2. Key legal issues
- Whether the trial court’s allocation of parenting time (majority to father) was contrary to the manifest weight of the evidence.
- Whether the trial court’s entry of a plenary order of protection (severely restricting mother’s parenting time) was supported by the evidence and not against the manifest weight of the evidence.

3. Holding/outcome
- The Fifth District affirmed the trial court on both issues. The appellate court found the parenting-time allocation and the plenary order of protection were not contrary to the manifest weight of the evidence.

4. Significant legal reasoning
- Deference to trial-court factfinding and credibility determinations: the court emphasized that it will not substitute its judgment for the trial judge’s credibility assessments where the record contains evidence supporting the court’s conclusions.
- Substantial evidentiary basis: the trial court relied on (a) an in-camera interview of the older child (E.W.) describing safety concerns and parental misconduct, (b) testimony about the mother’s history of substance abuse, seizures, alleged medication misuse, dangerous items/loaded firearms in the home, and instances of physical and emotional harm to the child, and (c) the guardian ad litem’s report recommending majority time to father and commenting on the mother’s lack of demonstrated cooperation. Those combined sources provided sufficient support under the manifest-weight standard for both the parenting allocation and the protective order.
- Temporary orders and supervised parenting time (including court-ordered medication management, testing, and medical clearance restrictions) buttressed the court’s safety findings.

5. Practice implications (takeaways for family-law practitioners)
- Build a robust record: in cases raising safety or substance-abuse issues, preserve corroborating evidence (in‑camera interviews, GAL reports, medical records, app/location data, witness testimony) because appellate review is deferential.
- Anticipate deference to trial-court credibility calls: emphasize factual inconsistencies and evidentiary gaps at trial if you seek reversal.
- Utilize and contest temporary orders (drug testing, supervised exchanges, medication control) early — they can influence final findings.
- When seeking or defending protective orders that affect parenting time, be prepared to address both best‑interest factors and family‑abuse standards; appellate courts will uphold orders supported by combined child testimony, GAL recommendations, and credible corroboration.