In re Marriage of Georgikos

Overview

This Rule 23 order affirms the trial court's modification of a 2019 allocation judgment, awarding the mother sole decision-making authority over education, extracurricular activities, and medical matters, and imposing temporary supervised parenting time on the father. The Third District found sufficient evidence of a substantial change in circumstances and that the father's conduct—including coaching the child against the mother and harassing medical providers—constituted serious endangerment to the child's mental health.

Key Facts

• Parents divorced in 2019 with joint decision-making and equal parenting time for A.G. (now age 9)
• Extensive litigation began in February 2023 over school placement, vaccinations, and medical care
• Father repeatedly challenged medical recommendations, cancelled appointments (including court-ordered sleep study), and caused two specialists to discharge A.G. due to his conduct
• Father posted negative online reviews about the GAL and sent thousands of emails demanding changes to her report
• A recorded conversation between father and child demonstrated coaching against the mother; trial court called it "the most alienating tape I have ever heard"
• Father's conduct included requiring child to use special soap/gloves, sleeping with the 8-year-old to "transfer energy," and inconsistently bringing child to extracurricular activities
• GAL testified father lacked ability to put A.G.'s healthcare needs above his own preferences

Procedural History

Appeal from the Circuit Court of Du Page County (18th Judicial Circuit), Case No. 19-D-1085, Judge Neal W. Cerne presiding. Following a five-day trial in August 2025, the court entered a temporary order suspending father's parenting time, later modified to two weeks supervised visitation. Written order issued September 9, 2025, awarding mother sole decision-making authority. Father appealed; Third District Appellate Court affirmed January 22, 2026.

Holdings

1. Substantial change in circumstances: The trial court's finding was not against the manifest weight of the evidence, considering the totality of circumstances including the child's increased age, enrollment in school, and extensive contentious litigation since 2019. (Standard: manifest weight of the evidence)
2. Modification of decision-making and parenting time: Awarding mother sole decision-making authority and modifying parenting time was supported by sufficient evidence under the best-interest factors of sections 602.5 and 602.7. (Standard: manifest weight of the evidence)
3. Serious endangerment finding: Evidence of father's coaching, alienating conduct, and the recorded conversation supported the finding that his conduct seriously endangered the child's mental health. (Standard: manifest weight of the evidence)
4. Temporary supervision restriction: Two weeks of supervised visitation with conditions was not an abuse of discretion given the endangerment finding. (Standard: abuse of discretion)

Legal Principles

• 750 ILCS 5/610.5(c): Modification requires proof by preponderance that substantial change occurred and modification serves child's best interest
• 750 ILCS 5/602.5: Decision-making allocation based on 15 enumerated best-interest factors
• 750 ILCS 5/602.7: Parenting time allocation based on 17 enumerated best-interest factors
• 750 ILCS 5/603.10(a): Restrictions on parenting time require finding by preponderance that parent's conduct "seriously endangered" child's mental, moral, physical health, or emotional development
• Key precedent: In re Marriage of Bates, 212 Ill. 2d 489 (great deference to trial court's credibility determinations); In re Marriage of Virgin, 2021 IL App (3d) 190650 (equal parenting may be set aside where parents cannot cooperate)
• Clarification: Court applied totality-of-circumstances analysis for substantial change, rejecting argument that individual factors (age, litigation) were insufficient standing alone

Practical Implications

• Document cumulative conduct: Individual behaviors may not constitute endangerment, but their cumulative effect can—maintain detailed records of patterns
• GAL testimony is critical: The GAL's observations about coaching, communication patterns, and parental fitness heavily influenced the outcome
• Recordings can backfire: Father's own recording became devastating evidence of parental alienation; advise clients about risks of recording children
• Provider relationships matter: Evidence that a parent's conduct caused medical/dental providers to discharge the child supports endangerment findings
• Distinguish this case: Father's conduct was extreme (thousands of emails, online harassment of GAL, "most alienating tape" court had heard); less egregious conduct may not support similar restrictions
• Temporary restrictions: Courts may impose short-term supervised visitation with specific conditions (positive speech, parenting classes) as remedial measures

Limitations/Caveats

• Rule 23 Order: This is an unpublished order under Supreme Court Rule 23 and may not be cited as precedent except in limited circumstances under Rule 23(e)(1)
• Fact-intensive: The extreme nature of father's conduct (harassment of providers, alienating recordings, thousands of emails) limits applicability to less egregious cases
• Dicta: Trial court's comments about father needing "psychotherapy" and characterizations of his behavior appear to be dicta rather than binding holdings
• Temporary nature: The supervision restriction was only two weeks; the order contemplates return to unsupervised alternating weekends and Wednesday evenings