In re Marriage of Burnett, 2021 IL App (5th) 200236-U

1) Case citation and parties
- In re Marriage of Burnett, 2021 IL App (5th) 200236-U (Ill. App. Ct., 5th Dist., May 14, 2021) (Rule 23 order; nonprecedential).
- Petitioner-Appellee: Daniel H. Burnett. Respondent-Appellant: Jennifer D. Burnett. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Massac County (No. 15-D-55).

2) Key legal issues
- Allocation of parental responsibilities/parenting time and whether the trial court’s best-interest findings were against the manifest weight of the evidence.
- Use and admissibility/weight of mental-health expert (custody evaluator) and guardian ad litem (GAL) reports.
- Division of marital property, reimbursement awards to the marital estate, and award of attorney fees (abuse-of-discretion review).
- Calculation of income for child support purposes where petitioner claimed accelerated depreciation of business assets (proper evidentiary showing).

3) Holding/outcome
- The appellate court affirmed in part, vacated in part, and remanded with instructions.
- Trial court’s best-interest determinations (including week-on/week-off or similar equal-sharing schedule) and consideration of expert/GAL reports were upheld.
- Property division, reimbursements, and attorney-fee awards were not an abuse of discretion and were affirmed.
- The child-support calculation was vacated in part and remanded because the trial court erred by allowing the petitioner to claim accelerated business depreciation without adequate evidentiary support.

4) Significant legal reasoning
- Custody: Both the court-appointed mental-health evaluator and the GAL recommended equal/shared parenting; the trial court’s findings comported with the manifest weight standard given the evidence (investigative contacts, school/provider input, in-person observations, and expert reports).
- Financials: Financial and equitable determinations reviewed for abuse of discretion; the appellate court found no such abuse as to property division, reimbursements, and fee awards based on the record.
- Child support error: The court held that a party who relies on business depreciation to reduce income for support must put forward evidence quantifying the depreciation and showing it is reasonable and necessary for producing income or operating the business. Absent such proof, accelerated depreciation cannot be presumed and may not be used to reduce income for support purposes.

5) Practice implications
- When business owners advance depreciation or other tax-driven deductions to lower support, counsel must introduce detailed evidence: composition of depreciation, capital vs. ordinary expenses, and whether deductions are reasonable/necessary to produce income. Failure to do so risks reversal/remand.
- Trial courts may properly rely on qualified custody evaluators and GAL reports; counsel should prepare to address and counter those reports at trial with specific evidence.
- Financial awards (property division, reimbursement, fees) remain within trial court discretion but require a complete record; stipulated valuations help streamline disposition.
- For expedited custody appeals (Ill. S. Ct. R. 311), expect strict timelines; ensure the record is complete (missing transcript pages can complicate appellate review).