In re Parentage of O.A., 2019 IL App (1st) 182502-U

- Case citation and parties
In re Parentage of O.A., 2019 IL App (1st) 182502‑U (1st Dist. May 21, 2019) (Rule 23 order). Petitioner‑appellee: Lauren C.; Respondent‑appellant: Michael M.; minor: O.A.

- Key legal issues
1. Whether a trial court may enter a one‑year plenary order of protection following a hearing on an emergency order of protection.
2. Whether the trial court complied with the statutory requirement (750 ILCS 60/214(c)(3)) to make specific findings of fact when issuing a plenary order after an emergency proceeding.
3. Whether the evidence supported a finding of abuse.

- Holding / outcome
The appellate court held the trial court did not exceed its authority by entering a plenary order after the hearing, but it erred by failing to make the statutorily required findings of fact under section 214(c). The plenary order was vacated and the case remanded for the trial court to make the required findings. (Non‑precedential under Supreme Court Rule 23.)

- Significant legal reasoning (concise)
The panel found the record straightforward and addressed the merits despite no appellee brief. It accepted that the Domestic Violence Act permits conversion to a longer plenary protection following a hearing, so the entry of a one‑year order was within the court’s power. However, section 214(c)(3) requires explicit findings of fact when proceeding from emergency relief to a plenary order; the trial court’s oral and written orders failed to state those specific statutory findings. Although the trial court made credibility determinations and found abuse based on testimony and text evidence (and ordered remedies such as 40 hours of counseling and restrictions on parenting‑time exchanges), the absence of the required statutory findings rendered the plenary order procedurally defective and subject to vacatur and remand for compliance.

- Practice implications for attorneys
- When seeking (or opposing) conversion of emergency relief to a plenary order, request and preserve on the record the specific findings required by 750 ILCS 60/214(c)(3).
- If representing the respondent, object where the court fails to announce statutorily required factual findings; preserve the issue for appeal.
- For petitioners, ensure the court articulates clear statutory findings to avoid remand.
- Be aware Rule 23 orders are non‑precedential; nonetheless, the procedural point is important: courts have power to enter plenary relief after emergency hearings but must comply precisely with statutory finding requirements.