In re Marriage of Kelly, 2023 IL App (3d) 220333-U

- Case citation and parties
In re Marriage of Kelly, 2023 IL App (3d) 220333‑U (Ill. App. Ct. Jan. 23, 2023) (Rule 23 order, non‑precedential). Petitioner‑Appellant: Keturah S. Kelly (mother). Respondent‑Appellee: Colin D. Kelly (father).

- Key legal issues
1) Whether the trial court abused its discretion in denying mother’s motion to vacate an agreed order transferring custody to father on the ground she entered it under duress.
2) Whether the trial court lacked authority to enter the agreed custody/relocation order because father’s underlying petition was improper.

- Holding/outcome
Affirmed. The appellate court held the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to vacate and that the court had authority to enter the agreed order.

- Significant legal reasoning (concise)
- Standard of review: denial of a motion to vacate an agreed order is reviewed for abuse of discretion.
- Duress requires credible proof of coercion that left no reasonable alternative and rendered assent involuntary. The court may weigh credibility and corroboration.
- The mother’s evidence (testimony that her attorney pressured her the morning of the hearing with threats of contempt, large bond, jail, and losing custody) was found not credible and insufficiently corroborated. The record showed: counsel entered an appearance, asked for a continuance (denied), then the parties’ lawyers negotiated and presented an agreement in open court; the trial judge conducted a colloquy, summarized agreement terms on the record, and neither party objected; the written agreed order mirrored the oral recitation; mother voluntarily withdrew pending pleadings.
- The guardian ad litem’s testimony and subsequent proceedings supported that the children had adjusted to relocation and that no emergency justification existed to vacate the order.
- On the jurisdiction/authority point, father had filed petitions seeking modification and removal based on changed circumstances; the court permissibly approved an agreed reallocation of parental responsibilities and custody.

- Practice implications for family attorneys
- High bar to vacate agreed orders: build contemporaneous record if client is claiming duress (immediate objections on the record, affidavits, witnesses, or contemporaneous communications).
- When negotiating in court after a denied continuance, ensure clients expressly state on the record they assent voluntarily and understand terms; consider documenting signed agreements before in‑court acceptance.
- Counsel should promptly pursue remedies (emergency petitions, contempt, evidentiary support) if opposing party fails to comply with agreed transfer terms; later claims of coercion will be credibility‑dependent.
- Use GAL testimony and objective evidence (school/therapy reports) to rebut claims of harm after relocation.