In re Marriage of Morgan L., 2023 IL App (5th) 230351-U

1. Case citation and parties
- In re Marriage of Morgan L., 2023 IL App (5th) 230351‑U (Ill. App. Ct., 5th Dist., filed Oct. 19, 2023; Rule 23 order).
- Petitioner‑Appellee: Morgan L. / Respondent‑Appellant: Gregory L.

2. Key legal issues
- Whether the trial court’s allocation of significant parental decision‑making and parenting time was against the manifest weight of the evidence.
- Whether the court erred in valuing marital property and in classifying payments made by appellant’s parents (claimed as nonmarital contribution) as gifts.
- Whether the court improperly allocated debt (including daycare expenses).

3. Holding/outcome
- The Fifth District affirmed the trial court (as modified to correct typos). The court held: (a) allocation of primary parental decision‑making authority and majority parenting time to the mother was not against the manifest weight of the evidence; (b) the trial court’s valuation of marital property, classification of payments by the father’s parents as gifts to the parties, and allocation of daycare expenses were not against the manifest weight of the evidence or an abuse of discretion.

4. Significant legal reasoning
- Standard of review: deference to trial court credibility and factual findings — parenting allocations reviewed for manifest weight; property valuation and allocation of debt reviewed for manifest weight/abuse of discretion.
- Parenting: trial court’s findings were supported by testimony that the mother was the primary caregiver, actively handled schooling and medical care, fostered stability (including moving to a better school district), and that the father had substance‑abuse history and made denigrating statements to the children. Witnesses described children’s behavioral responses after father’s parenting time and safety‑tinged exchanges (exchanges occurring at the police station). Those factual findings supported the trial court’s best‑interest determination.
- Property/nonmarital contribution: appellant’s evidence of an oral agreement and parental payments was insufficient to overcome the trial court’s conclusion that the funds were gifts to the parties rather than a segregable nonmarital contribution; the court’s valuation and classification were supported by the record.

5. Practice implications
- Preserve and document alleged nonmarital contributions: contemporaneous agreements, receipts, cancelled checks, or clear testimony are critical to rebut a gift characterization.
- In custody disputes, develop a record on caregiving responsibilities, parental fitness (including substance‑use treatment and contemporaneous conduct), and concrete effects on children (school, behavior) — trial courts get wide deference on credibility.
- Document safety concerns and problematic exchanges (police reports, texts) to justify supervised/neutral exchanges or restrictions.
- Don’t assume an absent appellee brief will yield reversal; appellate courts may decide merits if the record is straightforward.
- Ensure final orders are precise to avoid appellate corrections for clerical/typographical errors.