In re Marriage of Miller, 2023 IL App (5th) 220573-U

- Case citation and parties
In re Marriage of Miller, 2023 IL App (5th) 220573-U. Petitioner‑Appellant: Brooke A. Miller; Respondent‑Appellee: Randall Miller. (Rule 23 order — non‑precedential except in limited circumstances.)

- Key legal issues
Whether the trial court abused its discretion / rendered a decision against the manifest weight of the evidence in denying the custodial parent’s petition to relocate with the minor children; whether the proposed move was in the children’s best interests and whether the relocating parent presented a reasonable parenting‑time/transportation plan to preserve the non‑custodial parent’s relationship with the children.

- Holding / outcome
The appellate court reversed the trial court’s denial of the mother’s relocation petition and remanded with directions to reallocate parenting time, instructing the trial court to allow the relocation and to adopt a parenting‑time schedule that affords the father liberal time with the children.

- Significant legal reasoning (condensed)
The mother presented unrebutted, substantial evidence supporting relocation: a concrete job offer as program director at Concordia University with roughly a $40,000 salary increase and student‑loan repayment benefits; superior educational and extracurricular opportunities for the children in Cedarburg, Wisconsin; the children’s expressed preference and enthusiasm for the move; and a proposed plan to share transportation and preserve the father’s visitation (meeting halfway in Champaign, flexible holiday/summer arrangements, remote contact). The father’s record of substantial child‑support arrearages and inconsistent provision of health insurance, plus his limited use of available summer parenting time, undercut arguments that relocation would frustrate the parent–child relationship. Weighing these factors, the court concluded the trial court’s denial was against the manifest weight of the evidence and therefore reversed.

- Practice implications for family law attorneys
- Prepare a detailed relocation record: concrete employment terms, quantified financial benefit, documentary proof of educational/program advantages, and evidence of the children’s views.
- Propose a practical, specific parenting‑time/transportation plan (halfway exchange points, holiday/summer schedule, travel cost allocation) to show preservation of the non‑custodial parent’s relationship.
- Anticipate and rebut concerns about motives (e.g., avoidance of visitation) and adverse effects on extended‑family contact. Document efforts to facilitate visitation (invitations to visit, school tours, remote contact arrangements).
- Develop evidence about the non‑custodial parent’s exercise of time and compliance with support/insurance obligations; these facts can be persuasive on best‑interest balancing.
- Remember appellate posture: relocation denials are reviewed for manifest weight/abuse of discretion; a well‑documented record is crucial to prevail on appeal.