In re Marriage of Lindell, 2023 IL App (2d) 220055

In re Marriage of Lindell, 2023 IL App (2d) 220055 (2d Dist. Dec. 18, 2023)

Parties
- Petitioner/Counterrespondent-Appellee: Mark R. Lindell
- Respondent/Counterpetitioner-Appellant: Joanna E. Lindell

Key legal issues
- Whether the trial court’s allocation of parental responsibilities (sole decision‑making to father) and order of supervised parenting time for mother was against the manifest weight of the evidence.
- Whether the trial court erred in relying on the case evaluator’s and guardian ad litem’s reports and testimony.
- Appellate procedural issue: sufficiency of the record on appeal (transcripts and exhibits) to permit review.

Holding/outcome
- Affirmed. The appellate court upheld the trial court’s allocation and supervised parenting-time order.
- The court also imposed sanctions on appellant (the opinion states “affirmed, with sanctions”) in connection with the appeal.

Significant legal reasoning
- Substantive standard: allocation decisions are entitled to deference and will not be reversed unless an abuse of discretion or the decision is against the manifest weight of the evidence.
- Factual basis: the trial court found, based largely on the extensive testimony and reports of the case evaluator (Dr. Amabile) and the guardian ad litem, that mother suffered longstanding mental-health and substance‑use problems and had engaged in conduct seriously endangering the children’s mental, moral, or physical health — supporting supervised parenting time and sole decision-making for father.
- Appellate procedural bar: the court could not reach the merits because the record on appeal was incomplete — no trial transcript or exhibits were included. Applying Foutch v. O’Bryant, 99 Ill.2d 389 (1984), the court presumes compliance of the trial court where the appellant fails to furnish an adequate record, and resolves doubts against the appellant. The mother’s late/supplemental filings and failure to explain why key materials were not before the trial court or provided on appeal doomed her challenge.
- Reconsideration claim rejected: the trial court properly denied the mother’s conclusory, conspiratorial motion to reconsider/new trial for lack of factual particularity and lack of newly discovered evidence.

Practice implications (for family-law attorneys)
- Preserve and assemble a complete record: secure and include trial transcripts and all exhibits when appealing; absence of those materials is often fatal under Foutch.
- When challenging evaluator/GAL findings, ensure the trial record contains contemporaneous contradictory evidence and targeted objections; appellate courts will not reweigh credibility without the record.
- Use Rule 2‑1203/reconsideration motions to present truly newly discovered evidence or show legal error; avoid conclusory conspiracy allegations unsupported by facts.
- Beware of sanctions: frivolous or dilatory appellate conduct (late briefs, incomplete records, unsupported allegations) can lead to sanctions under applicable rules (e.g., Illinois Supreme Court Rule 375).