In re Marriage of Heddleston, 2022 IL App (1st) 211014-U

1. Case citation and parties
- In re Marriage of Heddleston, 2022 IL App (1st) 211014-U (Mar. 14, 2022) (Rule 23 order; non‑precedential).
- Petitioner‑Appellant: David Heddleston. Respondent‑Appellee: Mary Kosinski. (Dissolution judgment from Virginia enrolled in Illinois.)

2. Key legal issues
- Whether the parties’ marital settlement agreement (MSA) that left the exact monthly visitation weekend to future agreement created an enforceable duty to negotiate in good faith.
- Whether the trial court properly dismissed, without an evidentiary hearing, Heddleston’s petition alleging abuse of allocated parenting time under 750 ILCS 5/607.5 based on Kosinski’s refusal to allow certain January 2021 visitation (COVID‑related test condition).

3. Holding/outcome
- The Appellate Court affirmed. The MSA imposes an enforceable obligation to negotiate reasonably (in good faith) about scheduling.
- However, Heddleston’s motion failed to plead facts that, if proven, would show Kosinski negotiated in bad faith or abused parenting time; dismissal without an evidentiary hearing was proper.

4. Significant legal reasoning
- Contract principles (applied under both Virginia and Illinois law) govern MSA interpretation; discretion in a contract must be exercised reasonably—not arbitrarily, capriciously, or contrary to parties’ reasonable expectations.
- The MSA explicitly left the precise monthly weekend open for mutual agreement; it did not promise any particular weekend to the noncustodial parent. Thus the covenant of good faith cannot be used to read an obligation into the agreement that does not exist. See Northern Trust Co. v. VIII S. Michigan Assocs. principle cited by court.
- A hearing is not automatic; pleadings must allege facts that, if true, would entitle the movant to relief. Here, allegations (requests, emails/texts, demand for negative COVID test, one hour supervised lawn visit) did not demonstrate a refusal to negotiate or objectively bad‑faith conduct.

5. Practice implications (concise)
- Draft MSAs with concrete fallback mechanisms when terms are left for future agreement: deadlines, tie‑breakers, arbitration/mediation procedures, objective scheduling rules, or presumptive default weekends.
- When alleging breach of an MSA duty to negotiate, plead and preserve specific factual allegations of bad faith (e.g., categorical refusals, communications showing arbitrary or insincere negotiation, pattern of obstruction, refusal to consider alternatives). Include documentary evidence in the court record.
- If opposing enforcement claims, emphasize the absence of contractual obligations and produce contemporaneous communications showing negotiation or reasonable constraints (health/safety requests).
- Preserve a transcript/record of hearings and consider choice‑of‑law arguments when MSAs originate in another state.