In re Marriage of Taylor S., 2023 IL App (4th) 230520-U

In re Marriage of Taylor S., 2023 IL App (4th) 230520‑U (Sept. 27, 2023) (Ill. App. Ct., 4th Dist.; Rule 23 order — nonprecedential)

1) Case citation and parties
- In re Marriage of Taylor S., 2023 IL App (4th) 230520‑U.
- Petitioner‑Appellee: Taylor S.; Respondent‑Appellant: Cameron S. (parenting/time modification dispute).

2) Key legal issues
- Whether a petition to modify parenting time should survive a motion to dismiss where the petitioner alleges (a) a “substantial change in circumstances” from the prior parenting agreement under 750 ILCS 5/610.5, and (b) alternatively, that modification is permissible under the six‑month “actual arrangement” exception in 750 ILCS 5/610.5(e)(1) (i.e., the proposed schedule reflected the child’s actual care for six months without objection).

3) Holding/outcome
- The appellate court affirmed dismissal of the father’s amended petition to modify parenting time. The court held the petition failed to plead sufficient facts showing a substantial change in circumstances not contemplated by the parenting agreement or facts establishing an unobjected‑to six‑month actual arrangement. The appeal was considered jurisdictionally proper; the dismissal constituted a final, appealable order for purposes of the appeal.

4) Significant legal reasoning
- The parenting agreement expressly provided mother majority time, father every‑other‑weekend minimum, and contemplated “good faith flexibility” and additional time “by mutual agreement.” The court relied on those provisions to conclude that alleged deviations (including earlier week‑on/week‑off arrangements) were within the scope of contemplated flexibility and therefore not necessarily a substantial change.
- The petition’s allegations did not plausibly establish that the week‑on/week‑off arrangement existed for the six months immediately preceding the filing without parental objection, as required to invoke the statutory six‑month actual‑arrangement modification route.
- The record lacked a hearing transcript, but the appellate court addressed jurisdiction and merits based on the pleadings and orders.

5) Practice implications (concise)
- When seeking parenting‑time modification plead specific, time‑framed facts showing a substantial change not contemplated by the parenting agreement — include dates, communications, course‑of‑conduct, and how the change adversely affects the child’s best interests.
- To invoke the six‑month actual‑arrangement rule, allege and document continuous, unobjected‑to care for the statutorily required period immediately before filing.
- Preserve the record (transcripts, calendars, written agreements/emails, affidavits). If dismissal occurs, be mindful of finality language (prejudice) and Rule 304(a) issues when appealing.
- Agreements that expressly allow flexibility will make it harder to show a “substantial change” based on deviations by agreement.