In re Parentage of Scarlett Z.-D., 2015 IL 117904

- Case citation and parties
In re Parentage of Scarlett Z.-D., 2015 IL 117904. Petitioner/Appellant below: James R.D. (father-figure); Respondent/Appellee: Maria Z. (mother/adoptive parent).

- Key legal issues
1. Whether equitable adoption (as recognized in DeHart v. DeHart, 2013 IL 114137) provides standing to a nonlegal parent to pursue custody/parentage claims.
2. Whether plaintiff’s standing challenge was forfeited by procedural timing (sections 2‑615/2‑619 motions).
3. Viability of common‑law contract, promissory estoppel, and functional/psychological parent theories to establish custody rights.

- Holding/outcome
The Illinois Supreme Court held that the DeHart equitable‑adoption doctrine does not apply to child custody proceedings. It affirmed the appellate court in part, reversed in part, and affirmed the circuit court judgment denying petitioner custody/support and dismissing his common‑law contract claims.

- Significant legal reasoning (concise)
Facts: Maria (Slovakian national) adopted Scarlett abroad; petitioner James lived with them, functioned as father, financed the foreign adoption, and provided economic/parental support but never obtained legal parental status in Illinois. The circuit court found family life but concluded Jim lacked legal standing; common‑law contract claims were dismissed under 2‑615. On remand after DeHart, the appellate court thought equitable adoption might supply standing. The Supreme Court rejected that extension. It emphasized that DeHart’s equitable‑adoption doctrine arose in the context of inheritance/estate law and equity, not family‑law custody disputes. The Court declined to create a new route to parental status in custody actions because custody statutes and standing rules provide the proper framework for allocating parental rights, and creating equitable parental status for custody would improperly alter statutory protections/relationships (including respecting legal parents’ rights). The Court also rejected Jim’s procedural claim that Maria forfeited her standing defense: her 2‑619 motion was timely and raised standing within the pleadings period.

- Practice implications
• Equitable adoption (per DeHart) should not be relied upon to obtain custody/parentage rights in Illinois; its utility is limited to contexts like inheritance.
• Nonlegal caregivers should secure legal parental status through statutory mechanisms (formal adoption, domesticating foreign adoptions, paternity/parentage proceedings) rather than relying on contract or equitable doctrines.
• Defendants should timely raise standing under 2‑619 to preserve the defense in custody cases.
• Plaintiffs asserting functional/psychological/de facto parent theories face significant hurdles in Illinois family courts absent statutory recognition or formal adoption.