Find Legal Information

Docket No. 94677-Agenda 15-March 2003.

In re MARRIAGE OF SORYIA COLLINGBOURNE, Appellant, 
and GEOFF B. COLLINGBOURNE, Appellee.

Opinion filed May 22, 2003.

CHIEF JUSTICE McMORROW delivered the opinion of thecourt:

Soryia Collingbourne, the custodial parent of the parties'minor son Tyler, filed a petition in the circuit court of KaneCounty for leave to remove Tyler from the State of Illinois toMassachusetts. The circuit court granted the petition for removal,finding that the best interests of Tyler would be served by allowinghim to move to Massachusetts with his mother. A majority of theappellate court reversed, holding that the circuit court's decisionto grant the petition for removal was against the manifest weightof the evidence. 332 Ill. App. 3d 665. For the reasons that follow,we reverse the judgment of the appellate court.

BACKGROUND

Soryia and Geoff Collingbourne were married on June 13,1985. As a result of the marriage, two children were born to theparties: Geoffrey, born January 11, 1986, and Tyler, born January10, 1991. The parties' marriage was dissolved on September 1,1999. The judgment for dissolution of marriage incorporated amarital settlement agreement, which provided that although Soryiaand Geoff were to have joint custody of the children, Soryia wasawarded sole physical custody of Tyler, and Geoff was awardedsole physical custody of Geoffrey. The marital settlementagreement also incorporated a joint parenting agreement. The jointparenting agreement reiterated that although the parties wereawarded joint custody of both children, the physical custody of thechildren was split between the parents. The joint parentingagreement specifically provided that both parties were to haveequal rights and responsibilities for the major decisions inconnection with the education, recreation, health care and religioustraining of the children. However, the agreement left day-to-daydecisions with respect to the children within the sole discretion ofthe custodial parent. The joint parenting agreement also set forththe visitation schedule between the parents and the children. Eachparent was to have both children every other weekend, and theparties agreed to have the children on alternate holidays. Theagreement also allowed additional visitation, as authorized.

On June 15, 2001, Soryia petitioned the circuit court of KaneCounty for the removal of Tyler, then 10 years of age, from Illinoisto the State of Massachusetts. In her petition, Soryia alleged thatshe had become engaged to Mark Rothman, who resided inSharon, Massachusetts. For the past 11 years, Mark had ownedand operated his own business in Sharon, Mark Rothman &Associates, and his business prevented him from relocating fromthat geographic area. Soryia also alleged in her petition that uponmoving to Sharon, she would become an employee of Mark'sbusiness, earn an annual base salary of $75,000, and, due to aseries of incentives, had the potential to increase her income up to$100,000 per year. Soryia stated that she was currently employedby PetAg, Inc., with a base annual salary of $50,000. Soryiaalleged, however, that her employment with PetAg was "injeopardy due to the company's severe financial difficulties."Soryia stated that PetAg plant workers "have had their pay cut upto 50%," and that because "[c]ompany bonuses have beenterminated due to said financial problems," she did not receive herquarterly financial bonus.

Soryia further alleged in the petition that, in addition to thebetter financial opportunity that the move to Massachusetts wouldprovide, she would also not be required to travel on overnightbusiness trips, as she was frequently required to do as part of heremployment with PetAg. Soryia also stated that in her newposition she could structure her work hours so that she could behome with Tyler before and after school. Soryia contrasted thiswith her current work arrangement, which required Tyler to spendone hour in the morning and two hours after school in day care.During the summer months, Tyler's time in day care increased tonine hours per day, coinciding with Soryia's work schedule. Soryiaalleged that Tyler "expressed his displeasure" with this situation.

In addition, Soryia alleged that under her current workarrangement, it was difficult for Tyler to engage in extracurricularactivities. According to Soryia, if she and Tyler were allowed tomove to Massachusetts, Tyler could become involved in manyextracurricular activities, including sports, music, theater, anddance. Soryia also alleged that Tyler would reap an academicbenefit from the move, based upon her opinion that the Sharonschool district was "significantly better" than the Hampshireschool district in which Tyler was currently enrolled.

Soryia further alleged in the petition that Tyler's residenceand community would be enhanced, as the move would allowTyler to live in a three-bedroom, 3,000 square foot home,surrounded by woods. At the time Soryia filed the petition, she andTyler were living in a two-bedroom apartment in Huntley, whichafforded Tyler with limited access to children of his own age.

Soryia also alleged in the petition that Geoff "has not activelyparticipated" in Tyler's day-to-day life, and that on numerousoccasions Geoff has worked on Saturdays rather than spend hisentire scheduled visitation time with Tyler.

In sum, Soryia alleged that as a result of the financial andother opportunities offered by the move, the quality of both herand Tyler's lives would be significantly enhanced. Soryia allegedthat bettering the quality of life for both herself and Tyler was theonly motive for her move. As evidence of her good faith, Soryiaproposed a visitation schedule that would provide Geoff with moretime with Tyler than he had under the existing visitationarrangement, with visitation periods of an extended duration. Withrespect to visitation between Tyler and his brother Geoffrey,Soryia noted that Geoffrey was nearly 16 years old and that he andTyler did not share many of the same interests and did not spenda substantial amount of time together. Nevertheless, under theproposed visitation schedule, Soryia asserted, they would alsohave an increased amount of visitation time together.

On July 12, 2001, Geoff filed his answer to Soryia's removalpetition. Geoff denied that he was not actively involved in Tyler'slife, and also denied that he chose to work on Saturday rather thanspend scheduled visitation time with Tyler. Geoff did admit,however, that due to his profession as an electrician, he sometimeshad to work on Saturday mornings during the summer, and thatthis conflicted with the scheduled visitation.

It was Geoff's position that Soryia was seeking to improveonly the quality of her own life, and that Tyler's quality of lifewould be adversely affected if Tyler were separated from hisfather, brother, extended family, friends, and the community inwhich he had been raised. Geoff also stated that both his fiancee,Carol Lynn, and his sister, Lori Price, had offered to provideoccasional day care for Tyler. In addition, Geoff observed that theHampshire park district could provide Tyler with the opportunityfor several extracurricular or after-school activities. Geoffmaintained that Soryia's proposed visitation schedule would denyhim ongoing contact with Tyler, and would deny Tyler contactwith his brother. Geoff maintained that his objections to Tyler'sremoval were in the child's best interests, and requested that thecourt deny the removal petition. Geoff further stated that if Soryiachose to move to Massachusetts without Tyler, Tyler's physicalcustody should be transferred to him and a visitation schedulebetween Tyler and his mother should be entered.

The circuit court held a hearing on Soryia's petition overseveral days during the month of August 2001. Soryia testified thatshe is employed as a national sales manager by PetAg, Inc., whichis located in Hampshire. Soryia earned an annual base pay of$50,000, which, in the past, had been increased by quarterlybonuses pegged to the company's profits. For example, in the year2000, Soryia earned a $6,000 bonus. However, because thecompany has experienced financial difficulties, no bonuses werepaid in 2001. According to Soryia, her job routinely required herto travel on overnight business trips. However, due to thecompany's financial problems, her travel had decreased. Asexamples of the company's financial problems, Soryia stated thatthe corporate credit card that employees used to cover travelexpenses was discontinued due to nonpayment, merchandisevendors required that the company pay up front for purchases, andsome plant workers experienced a 50% cut in pay. Soryia statedthat in an attempt to seek other employment she had placed herresume on a web site. However, she also admitted that she didnothing else to seek other employment in this geographic area.

Soryia testified that she resided with Tyler in a two-bedroomapartment in Huntley, and that Geoff lived with Geoffrey in asingle-family home in nearby Hampshire. According to Soryia,upon the dissolution of their marriage the parties agreed to splitthe physical custody of the boys because Geoffrey is very active inthe community and in sports, and has had a very close relationshipwith his father. Soryia testified that she had exercised all of hervisitation with Geoffrey, but, that due to work commitments,Geoff had missed a portion of between 15 and 20 Saturdays of hisvisitation with Tyler in the year 2000. Soryia further stated thatGeoff's visitation with Tyler was otherwise consistent, and that theparties often spent time with the children during the weekdays thatwas in addition to that set forth in the joint parenting agreement.Soryia testified that under the agreement, Geoff would care forTyler when her employment required her to make overnightbusiness trips, which averaged about two times per month. InSeptember 2000, however, Geoff accepted a new job that requiredhim to leave home very early in the morning. Because she did notwant Tyler to get up so early and be dropped off at day care forseveral hours before school started, Soryia hired a baby-sitter tostay with Tyler in their apartment on the nights that she traveled,and to then take him to school in the morning. According toSoryia, Geoff did not object to this arrangement.

Soryia testified that she believes that Tyler's relationship withhis father is "very important," and that she has strived to furtherthis relationship, as well as Tyler's relationship with Geoff'sextended family. For example, Soryia stated that it was a traditionthat the children spend holidays and family events with Geoff'sfamily, and that if those occasions fell on her scheduled weekends,she would nevertheless allow the children to stay with Geoff.Soryia stressed that she does not want to limit Geoff's access toTyler.

With respect to Tyler's extracurricular activities, Soryiaexplained that although Tyler's school day ended at 2:30 p.m., itwas difficult for him to become involved in extracurricularprograms offered by the school or the Huntley or Hampshire parkdistricts because most programs ended in the early afternoon andrequired that a parent pick up the child at that time. BecauseSoryia's work day extended until 5 p.m., she was unable toaccommodate this time schedule. As another result of Soryia'swork schedule, Tyler had to attend day care for an hour in themorning before school and for approximately two to three hoursafter school. Soryia testified that it was only after she picked upTyler from day care that a period of time commenced within whichTyler would do homework, go to the park, or participate in otheractivities in which he was interested. For example, in the previousfall Soryia was able to enroll Tyler in a dance program that heldclasses in the evening. Tyler apparently enjoyed the program, andGeoff attended the dance recitals. Soryia also testified that Tylerhad not participated in any extracurricular activities over thesummer because he had to attend day care during the hours thatshe worked. According to Soryia, Tyler is unhappy in day care.

Soryia stated that on one occasion, after the removal petitionhad been filed, Tyler told her that Geoff's sister, Lori Price, hadoffered to watch him periodically so that he did not have to go tothe day care center every day. Soryia stated that she did not speakwith Lori, and that she told Tyler that discussions about his carewere between her and his father. Soryia further testified that on adifferent occasion Tyler informed her that Geoff's new wife, CarolLynn, had also offered to provide some child care. Soryia testifiedthat she thought it was "inappropriate" for these offers to berelayed through Tyler, and that they should be discussed betweenthe parties. Soryia stated that she did not accept the offer.

With respect to Tyler's education, Soryia stated that Tylerattends Hampshire Elementary School and had just completed thefourth grade. According to Soryia, in the past year Geoff had notattended Tyler's parent-teacher conferences and rarely attendedactivities at Tyler's school. Soryia confirmed that Geoffoccasionally attended such events in the past. Soryia stated thatalthough the Hampshire schools, in her opinion, are "adequate,"she believed that Tyler would receive a better education in Sharon,Massachusetts. Soryia testified that as part of her research into theSharon school system, she reviewed statistics which she purchasedover the Internet, contacted the Sharon schools, and spoke with theSharon school superintendent. Based upon her research, Soryiawas of the opinion that the Sharon school district could offer Tylernot only a superior education, but also greater opportunities forextracurricular activities. Soryia explained that, based upon herresearch, she believed that the ACT and SAT scores earned bySharon students were higher than those of students in Hampshire,that the student-teacher ratio in the Sharon schools is lower thanthat in Hampshire, and that the percentage of Sharon students whogo on to attend a four-year college is higher than in Hampshire.Soryia stated that these facts were very important to her, as herultimate goal is that Tyler attend college. In addition, Soryia statedthat the Sharon school system has an after-school "communityenrichment" program where students are transported from theschool to various sites to engage in activities such as videomaking,horseback riding, and cooking. Further, if Tyler were allowed tomove, Soryia stated, the school he would attend is located sevenminutes from Mark's home. Tyler could take the bus, or Soryiacould drive or walk him there.

Soryia also testified that although Tyler is still in elementaryschool, his brother Geoffrey attends high school. Because Tylerand his brother have a five-year age difference, they also havedifferent interests. According to Soryia, Geoffrey is very active insoccer, and has played both on local teams and on teams whichhave traveled to soccer meets in different cities and states over theweekends. Soryia described the relationship between Tyler andGeoffrey as a "love-hate relationship."

Soryia further testified that she became engaged to MarkRothman earlier in the year, after a relationship of about 1