In re Marriage of Rabbat, 2023 IL App (3d) 220174-U

- Case citation and parties
In re Marriage of Rabbat, 2023 IL App (3d) 220174-U (Ill. App. Ct. Oct. 31, 2023) (Rule 23 order; non‑precedential). Petitioner-Appellee: Joyce Rabbat. Respondent-Appellant: Goran Topalo.

- Key legal issues
1) Whether the trial court abused its discretion by awarding mother sole decision-making authority over the child's religious upbringing.
2) Whether the court erred in making mother the primary residential parent (slightly greater parenting time), including granting her Sundays and religious holidays.

- Holding / outcome
The appellate court affirmed. The trial court’s allocation of sole religious decision-making to Joyce and its parenting‑time allocation (mother the majority residential parent; father granted specified parenting time—three nights and three days per week under the final plan, with limitations to accommodate church attendance) were not an abuse of discretion.

- Significant legal reasoning (concise)
- Standard of review: discretionary determinations about allocation of parental responsibilities and parenting time are reviewed for abuse of discretion and deferred to the trial court’s credibility findings.
- Factual basis: the record showed both parents identified as Catholic (different rites), but religion was more important to Joyce; J.T. had not been baptized; Joyce historically took the lead on religious practice. Several evaluators and the GAL testified; experts were mixed but agreed the parents intended Joyce to “take the lead on religion.” The GAL and one evaluator recommended more equal time, but another evaluator and Joyce’s expert recommended mother as major residential parent and sole religious decision-maker.
- The court credited testimony showing Joyce’s greater religious involvement and concerns about Father’s past cooperation; it reasonably found that awarding sole religious authority and slightly greater residential time served the child’s best interests. The appellate court found these factual findings were supported by the record and not arbitrary.

- Practice implications for family law attorneys
- Build a clear factual record on parental practice and agreement about religion (attendance, baptism, who has historically directed religious upbringing). Trial courts rely heavily on who has exercised and prioritized religious practice.
- Where religious upbringing is contested, present evaluators/GAL testimony and contemporaneous documentary evidence (church attendance, communications about baptism, caregiving routines).
- If seeking or opposing allocation of religious decision-making, propose concrete parenting-time and holiday schedules that reflect religious observance needs (e.g., Sunday attendance, holiday allocations).
- Preserve credibility issues and cooperation evidence: appellate courts defer to trial credibility and abuse‑of‑discretion review.
- Note Rule 23 status: this opinion is non‑precedential and may be cited only in limited circumstances.