In re Marriage of Swafford, 2023 IL App (5th) 230239-U

In re Marriage of Swafford, No. 5‑23‑0239 (Ill. App. 5th Dist. Aug. 28, 2023)

1) Case citation and parties
- In re Marriage of Swafford, 2023 IL App (5th) 230239‑U.
- Petitioner‑Appellee: Aubrie Swafford. Respondent‑Appellant: Jesse Swafford.

2) Key legal issues
- Allocation of decision‑making parental responsibility.
- Allocation of parenting time (primary/residential parent).
- Whether the trial court properly ordered the parties to equally share children’s education and extracurricular expenses.
- Standard of review and preservation/invited‑error issues on appeal.

3) Holding/outcome
- The Fifth District affirmed the trial court’s orders: (a) granting decision‑making responsibility and majority parenting time to Aubrie; and (b) requiring the parties to equally share the children’s education and extracurricular expenses.

4) Significant legal reasoning
- The appellate court applied the deferential standards applicable to custody/parenting determinations (findings will not be disturbed unless against the manifest weight of the evidence) and found the trial court’s factual findings supported by the record.
- The opinion notes trial testimony and exhibits showing parental conduct and parenting history (e.g., primary caretaking, communications about school drop‑offs, use of a GPS tracker on the mother’s car, recordings/contacts involving the child), which the trial court could permissibly weigh when making best‑interest findings.
- On the expense allocation, the court affirmed because appellant failed to present any argument regarding the education expense allocation to the trial court (forfeiture), and his challenge to extracurricular expense sharing was barred by the invited‑error doctrine (he had caused/agreed to the ruling or course of conduct at trial), so appellate relief was unavailable.

5) Practice implications
- Custody/parenting determinations are reviewed deferentially; litigants must develop a full factual record on best‑interest factors at trial to preserve appellate challenges.
- Preserve objections and advance specific legal arguments in the trial court on financial allocations (education/extracurricular) — appellate courts routinely find forfeiture where trial objections/arguments were not made.
- Beware the invited‑error doctrine: tactical conduct or agreed‑to stipulations at trial can preclude later appellate attack.
- Client conduct (tracking, involving third parties, communications about children) can materially influence a court’s credibility and best‑interest findings; advise clients on litigation‑sensitive behavior.
- When negotiating parenting time, document agreements and child‑support contingencies carefully (this case illustrates differing support amounts tied to parenting‑time allocations).