In re Marriage of Mardi L. A.

1

2023 IL App (4th) 220061-U

In re MARRIAGE OF MARDI L. A., Petitioner-Appellee, and JAMAL A., Respondent-Appellant.

No. 4-22-0061

Court of Appeals of Illinois, Fourth District

March 7, 2023

This Order was filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and is not precedent except in the limited circumstances allowed under Rule 23(e)(1).

Appeal from the Circuit Court of Rock Island County No. 20D234 Honorable John L. McGehee, Judge Presiding.

JUSTICE STEIGMANN delivered the judgment of the court. Presiding Justice DeArmond and Justice Zenoff concurred in the judgment.

ORDER

STEIGMANN, JUSTICE

¶ 1 Held: The appellate court affirmed the trial court's order allocating parenting time and decision-making responsibilities because the order was not against the manifest weight of the evidence. The appellate court vacated the trial court's order relating to support and maintenance and remanded for further proceedings.

¶ 2 Petitioner, Mardi L. A., and respondent, Jamal A., were married in 2002 and had two children during the marriage U.A. (a son, born October 2003) and S.A. (a daughter, born November 2006), and Jamal adopted two of petitioner's children from a prior marriage. (We note that U.A. is no longer a minor.) In July 2020, Mardi filed (1) a petition for dissolution of marriage and (2) a notice of intended relocation, explaining she had relocated to Utah in June 2020 due to safety concerns.

¶ 3 In June 2021, the trial court entered an order (1) allocating primary decision-making and the vast majority of parenting time to Mardi, (2) finding relocation of the children to Utah was in the children's best interests, (3) deciding Jamal would be responsible for child support from the date of the petition's filing, and (4) denying maintenance to either party.

¶ 4 Jamal appeals, arguing the trial court's order was against the manifest weight of the evidence. Jamal contends (1) the court erred by considering improper factors when it permitted Mardi to relocate the children to Utah without notice, (2) the court's allocation of parenting time and decision making was improper because (a) Mardi took the children to Utah unilaterally and (b) he was the primary caregiver before the separation, and (3) the court improperly entered rulings concerning child support and maintenance despite the court having earlier ordered those issues reserved at the evidentiary hearing.

¶ 5 We agree only with Jamal's last argument. Accordingly, we vacate the trial court's judgment relating to support and maintenance and remand for further proceedings. We otherwise affirm the court's judgment.

¶ 6 I. BACKGROUND

¶ 7 A. Procedural History

¶ 8 In July 2020, Mardi A. filed a petition for dissolution of marriage. The petition alleged that, in June 2020, Mardi "fled for her safety to Davis County, Utah," but she had lived continuously in Illinois with Jamal for more than 90 days before she left. The petition further alleged the parties married in May 2002 and had two children during the marriage, U.A. (born October 2003) and S.A. (born November 2006). Because U.A. is no longer a minor, only S.A is a subject of this appeal. (We note that Jamal adopted two of Mardi's children from a prior marriage, both of whom were over the age of majority at the time of the filing of the petition for dissolution.) The petition asserted Mardi was employed full-time as a human resource employee for "Army, Civilian Human Resource Agency NAF" and Jamal was a disabled veteran living in Rock Island, Illinois. The petition alleged that no agreement existed regarding support, allocation of parental responsibilities, or maintenance.

¶ 9 On the same day Mardi filed the petition, she also filed a notice of intended relocation pursuant to section 609.2(c) of the Illinois Marriage and Dissolution of Marriage Act (Act) (750 ILCS 5/609.2(c) (West 2018)), asserting (1) she intended to relocate with the minor children to Utah, (2) providing notice 60 days in advance was impracticable due to safety concerns, and (3) Mardi and the children were residing with Mardi's parents during the dissolution proceedings.

¶ 10 In August 2020, Jamal filed an answer to the petition, in which he admitted the parties did not have any agreement concerning the allocation of parental responsibilities. Jamal admitted Mardi had relocated to Utah with the children but denied it was necessary for her safety. Jamal further requested the children be returned to Rock Island because Mardi had relocated them without complying with the statutory requirements. Jamal requested the trial court to grant the petition for dissolution and award majority parenting time to him.

¶ 11 Also in August 2020, Jamal filed a "Motion for Immediate Return of Minor Children." Jamal argued that because Mardi unilaterally moved the children to Utah without first complying with section 609.2 of the Act, the trial court should order the children returned to Rock Island immediately.

¶ 12 Later in August 2020, Mardi filed a petition for temporary custody, maintenance, support, and attorney fees, in which she argued it was in the best interests of the children for Mardi to have temporary care, custody, and control of the children.

¶ 13 In September 2020, Mardi filed a response to Jamal's motion for immediate return of the minor children. In support of her response, Mardi attached her own affidavit, in which she explained (1) why she relocated to Utah and (2) how the children's remaining in Utah would be in their best interests. Specifically, Mardi averred that in late June 2020, in the presence of one of her children, Jamal pushed her by the neck and threatened to kill her. Mardi said she was leaving and told the two minor children to come with her, but Jamal refused to let them leave. Mardi then left by herself and went to the police for help. The police escorted Mardi back to her home. While Mardi was gone, Jamal had the children pack bags. When Mardi returned with the police, Jamal permitted Mardi to enter the home to pack but refused to let the police into the home. After confirming with the police that she could leave with the children, Mardi and the children left and headed to Utah.

¶ 14 Mardi explained that the family had lived in Illinois for less than a year and she had no support system there. Mardi's family, immediate and extended, lived in Utah. The children did not have many friends in Illinois because school had switched to remote learning as a result of COVID-19. Mardi took the children to Utah, where she lived with her parents, who provided financial assistance and other support. Mardi explained that things had greatly improved for her family since they had moved to Utah. The children were doing better mentally and emotionally and connected frequently with family.

¶ 15 In her affidavit, Mardi also detailed Jamal's behavior toward her and the children. Mardi stated Jamal had anger problems, frequently belittled her and the children, and was prone to angry outbursts. At times, Jamal would throw or break items. He also insulted Mardi and the children. Mardi explained that Jamal's controlling behavior once caused her to seek help to relocate to a safehouse while the family was living in Germany.

¶ 16 B. The Evidentiary Hearing

¶ 17 In September and October 2020, the trial court conducted hearings on Mardi's motion for temporary custody and Jamal's motion for immediate return. At those hearings, Mardi, S.A., and U.A. testified (the record does not include a report of proceedings). The court continued the matters until a full trial could be conducted.

¶ 18 In April 2021, the trial court conducted an evidentiary hearing on the petition for dissolution. At the beginning of the hearing, Jamal moved to continue the hearing as to the issues of support and maintenance due to a recent change in his disability income. The court decided to "reserve" the issues of support and maintenance so they could be addressed at another time.

¶ 19 At the hearing, Mardi, Jamal, S.A., U.A., and an adult child (who was the children's half-sister) testified. The testimony was largely consistent with the statements from Mardi in her affidavit. Mardi testified that (1) her employer had permitted her to relocate to Utah, (2) she had found her own home to live in, and (3) the children were doing extremely well. The half-sister testified she lived with the parties until she was 18 and Jamal's parenting style was controlling and harsh, which led to a tense home environment predicated on fear and a lack of emotional support.

¶ 20 The trial court conducted in camera examinations of S.A. and U.A., who at the time were respectively 14 and 17 years old. Both children stated that they wished to remain in Utah and preferred not to have any contact with Jamal. The children explained that Jamal was controlling, emotionally abusive to Mardi, and caused a great deal of stress and anxiety for everyone. U.A. testified that he was glad Mardi had left and he had been asking her to leave for years before she eventually did. Both children stated that they had not spoken with Jamal, aside from a single text message, since they had relocated to Utah, a period of 10 months.

¶ 21 The trial court told the children that this was their opportunity to say anything they wanted the court to know before it made a decision. When the children expressed the desire to have no contact with Jamal, the court asked the children again to make sure they understood the question. The court also asked for an explanation. The children reiterated that their lives were much better now that they had moved to Utah and stopped speaking with Jamal. In particular, the children had far less stress and anxiety and were able to enjoy life and make plans for the future.

¶ 22 At the conclusion of...