In re Marriage of Jarecki, 2022 IL App (1st) 220243-U

1. Case citation and parties
In re Marriage of Jarecki, 2022 IL App (1st) 220243‑U (1st Dist. Aug. 26, 2022) (Sup. Ct. R. 23 order; non‑precedential). Petitioner‑Appellant: Tomasz (Tom) Jarecki. Respondent‑Appellee: Katarzyna (Kasia) Gnacy‑Jarecki. Child: Casper.

2. Key legal issues
- Whether the trial court abused its discretion or reached a decision against the manifest weight of the evidence in granting mother’s petition to permanently relocate the child to New York City.
- Application of the statutory relocation/best‑interest factors and the weight to be given to evidence of parental history, employment/opportunity, support networks, and the likely impact on parenting time and parent‑child relationship.

3. Holding/outcome
The appellate court affirmed. The trial court’s written 26‑page decision finding six of the ten statutory factors favored relocation (the other four neutral) and concluding relocation was in Casper’s best interests was not against the manifest weight of the evidence.

4. Significant legal reasoning
- Standard of review: the appellate court applied the presumption in favor of the trial court’s factual and credibility findings and required the appellant to overcome the manifest‑weight standard.
- The trial court considered extensive testimony (mother, father, witnesses, guardian ad litem), documentary evidence (financials, job offer, texts, social‑media posts, criminal/order‑of‑protection records), and the GAL’s recommendation.
- The court credited evidence that mother had concrete job prospects, proximate childcare, a stronger support network in New York, and that relocation would provide a higher overall standard of living and educational opportunities for the child.
- The court weighed father’s trucking schedule and practical impediments to preserving parenting time against his ability and financial capability to travel; it found father’s assertions of impairment were not persuasive enough to overcome the mother’s evidence.
- Although the record contained domestic‑violence/stalking history and contested allegations about parental conduct and past threats to flee, the trial court did not disregard these facts but found them insufficient to defeat relocation under the totality of the circumstances.

5. Practice implications
- Prepare a full evidentiary record on each statutory relocation factor: employment offers, childcare/school logistics, support network, concrete parenting‑time proposals, and travel/cost allocations.
- Guardian ad litem recommendations carry significant weight; engage and provide the GAL with thorough, corroborating documentation.
- Anticipate and address credibility attacks (e.g., past threats to flee, criminal history) — concede where appropriate and contextualize.
- Preserve findings and objections in the record; appellate review is highly deferential to trial court credibility determinations in relocation disputes.
- Offer workable mechanisms to preserve the non‑relocating parent’s relationship (detailed schedules, financial arrangements for travel, virtual contact plans).