In re Marriage of Snellgrove, 2021 IL App (5th) 200332-U

- Case citation and parties
In re Marriage of Snellgrove, 2021 IL App (5th) 200332-U. Petitioner-Appellant: Eric Snellgrove. Respondent-Appellee: Rae Snellgrove n/k/a Rae Redding-McElroy. Appeal from Madison County circuit court (No. 19‑D‑935).

- Key legal issues
1) Whether Eric’s Illinois petition to modify allocation of parental responsibilities was barred by res judicata based on prior Alabama custody proceedings/orders.
2) Whether the Illinois appellate court has jurisdiction to hear the appeal despite a pro se citation error.
3) Whether Alabama certified court documents should be included in the appellate record.

- Holding/outcome
The Fifth District reversed the trial court’s dismissal of Eric’s Illinois modification petition on res judicata grounds and remanded for further proceedings. The court granted the mother’s motion to supplement the record with certified Alabama documents and denied her request to dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

- Significant legal reasoning (concise)
- Jurisdiction: The court rejected the procedural attack based on the appellant’s mis-citation of rules, finding appellate jurisdiction under Ill. S. Ct. Rule 304(b)(6) (appealable orders modifying parental responsibilities).
- Record supplementation: The court allowed four certified Alabama documents into the record (petition, October 24, 2018 order, motion to amend nunc pro tunc, and November 19, 2018 amendment) to clarify factual background.
- Res judicata: The appellate court concluded the trial court erred in finding res judicata because the factual showing did not establish that the Alabama proceedings constituted a final adjudication of the same claim/issues raised in the Illinois petition. The Illinois petition alleged sexual-abuse disclosures and sought modification and supervised visitation based on matters not resolved on the merits in Alabama (and arguably not fully litigated there). Because the necessary elements for claim preclusion (identity of cause of action, identity of parties, and a final judgment on the merits) were not adequately shown, dismissal was improper.

- Practice implications for family law attorneys
- Don’t assume foreign custody orders automatically bar subsequent modification petitions—carefully analyze whether the foreign order actually adjudicated the same claim/issues on the merits.
- When moving to dismiss on res judicata, develop the record to prove all three preclusion elements. Certified foreign judgments and orders are critical.
- Cite the correct appellate basis (e.g., Ill. S. Ct. R. 304(b)(6) for custody/parental-responsibility orders) and avoid reliance on citation technicalities as jurisdictional defenses.
- If alleged new facts (e.g., abuse disclosures) exist, be prepared to show they were not or could not have been fully litigated previously; they may support modification jurisdiction and defeat preclusion.