In re Marriage of Jessica A.S.

- Case citation and parties
In re Marriage of Jessica A.S., 2025 IL App (5th) 250297-U (5th Dist. Sept. 8, 2025) (Rule 23 order, non-precedential). Petitioner‑Appellant: Jessica A.S.; Respondent‑Appellee: Tyler S.

- Key legal issues
1. Whether the trial court abused its discretion in finding a substantial change of circumstances warranting modification of parenting time.
2. Whether the modified parenting time order served the minor child’s best interests.
3. Whether the trial court abused its discretion by denying Jessica’s request for an in camera interview of the child.

- Holding / Outcome
The appellate court affirmed. It held that (1) the trial court’s finding of a substantial change in circumstances was supported by a preponderance of the evidence; (2) the modification of parenting time was in the child’s best interests; and (3) the court did not abuse its discretion in denying the requested in camera interview.

- Significant legal reasoning (concise)
The father, a deployed service member, sought modification after ongoing scheduling conflicts and alleged parental noncooperation by Jessica, including limiting electronic contact (FaceTime), refusing to provide the child’s phone number, and resisting visitation or substituted grandparent visitation. The record contained: prior dissolution order addressing visitation and electronic contact; stipulated and temporary orders (including substitute grandparent visitation during deployment and a later temporary parenting schedule); a rule to show cause and an order directing compliance with FaceTime scheduling; testimony about repeated scheduling refusals, the child’s counseling statements preferring not to visit, extensive extracurricular activities, and parental concerns about the child’s comfort and fear of flying. The trial court weighed this evidence and found a material change and that a modified schedule better served the child’s interests. On the in camera request, the appellate court reiterated that trial courts have broad discretion to conduct (or decline) child interviews and found no abuse of that discretion on this record.

- Practice implications for family law attorneys
- Meticulously document all communication attempts, proposed schedules, and noncompliance (texts, emails, mediation notes, stipulated orders); these proved decisive.
- Seek specific interim relief (temporary orders, rule to show cause) to preserve and enforce electronic contact and substitute visitation while deployed.
- Use neutral platforms (OurFamilyWizard/MyFamilyWizard) and propose concrete scheduling protocols in pleadings to minimize “coordination” disputes.
- If seeking an in camera interview, justify necessity with specific facts (why the child’s testimony cannot be fairly inferred from other evidence and why the interview would materially aid disposition) because courts have wide discretion to deny such requests.