In re Marriage of Ferguson, 2019 IL App (2d) 190094-U

- Case citation and parties
In re Marriage of Ferguson, No. 2-19-0094, 2019 IL App (2d) 190094-U (Ill. App. Ct. June 27, 2019) (Rule 23 order; non-precedential). Petitioner/Appellee: Wendy Plenty Ferguson; Respondent/Appellant: Christopher Ferguson.

- Key legal issues
Whether the trial court abused its discretion or decision was against the manifest weight of the evidence in granting the custodial parent's amended motion to relocate the parties’ two children under section 609.2 of the Illinois Marriage and Dissolution of Marriage Act, 750 ILCS 5/609.2 (West 2018). Relevant considerations included the children’s best interests, educational opportunities, parental relationships, proposed parenting-time plan, reasons for relocation, and availability of support systems.

- Holding/outcome
The Second District affirmed. The appellate court held the trial court’s grant of mother’s relocation motion to Fishers, Indiana (near Indianapolis) was not against the manifest weight of the evidence.

- Significant legal reasoning
The trial court analyzed the statutory relocation factors in section 609.2 and concluded the relocation favored the children’s best interests. Key factual bases: (1) mother, although unemployed after a 2018 job loss, had a concrete, no-cost housing option with her brother and available extended-family childcare in Fishers; (2) the Fishers schools (Geist Elementary) were demonstrably superior (including a gifted program) and the children had been enrolled; (3) mother intended to seek employment and/or enroll in law school to improve her financial independence; (4) the children expressed a preference to move and would gain separate bedrooms and extracurricular opportunities; (5) the mother demonstrated willingness to facilitate the children’s relationship with the father (Skype/phone, co-parenting efforts); and (6) the GAL’s recommendation to deny based largely on potential disruption to the father’s relationship did not outweigh the other benefits. The appellate court afforded deference to the trial court’s factual findings and credibility assessments and found no abuse of discretion.

- Practice implications
- Demonstrate concrete, verifiable benefits of the proposed location (schools, extracurriculars, housing/support) — generalities are weak.
- Show a realistic plan for the relocating parent’s financial support (employment, school plans) and available no-cost or low-cost caregiving from family.
- Address preservation of the nonmoving parent’s relationship with specific parenting-time proposals and logistics; a GAL’s adverse recommendation is persuasive but not dispositive.
- Present children’s preferences and developmental/educational needs as supportive evidence.
- Remember appellate review is deferential (manifest-weight/abuse-of-discretion); evidentiary and credibility findings at trial are difficult to overturn.