In re Marriage of Taylor

9 Citing cases

  1. In re Marriage of Pfeiffer

    237 Ill. App. 3d 510 (Ill. App. Ct. 1992)   Cited 51 times
    Noting that a mother's establishment of a new and successful marriage relationship would enhance the mother's quality of life and in that way would indirectly enhance the child's quality of life

    Additionally, the court properly considered the indirect benefits to Adam which would result from Vicki establishing a new and successful marriage relationship. ( In re Marriage of Carlson (1991), 216 Ill. App.3d 1077, 576 N.E.2d 578; In re Marriage of Taylor (1990), 202 Ill. App.3d 740, 559 N.E.2d 1150.) This would enhance her quality of life significantly and in that way would indirectly enhance the child's quality of life.

  2. In re Marriage of Roppo

    225 Ill. App. 3d 721 (Ill. App. Ct. 1991)   Cited 6 times

    To the contrary, the court there reasoned that given the length of the summer visits, the child would spend even more time with siblings and friends. We reached the same result in In re Marriage of Taylor (1990), 202 Ill. App.3d 740, 559 N.E.2d 1150, and In re Marriage of Carlson (1991), 216 Ill. App.3d 1077, 576 N.E.2d 578. In Taylor, we concluded that where a move significantly enhances the general quality of life for the wife, the custodial parent, it therefore indirectly beneficially affects the child's quality of life.

  3. In re Marriage of Collingbourne

    204 Ill. 2d 498 (Ill. 2003)   Cited 71 times
    Observing that the best interests of the child is the "paramount question" that must be considered in a removal action

    See, e.g., In re Marriage of Shaddle, 317 Ill. App. 3d 428, 434 (2000); Ludwinski, 312 Ill. App. 3d at 499; In re Marriage of Miroballi, 225 Ill. App. 3d 1094, 1098 (1991); In re Marriage of Carlson, 216 Ill. App. 3d 1077, 1081 (1991); In re Marriage of Roppo, 225 Ill. App. 3d 721, 728 (1991); In re Marriage of Taylor, 202 Ill. App. 3d 740, 745 (1990); In re Marriage of Zamarripa-Gesundheit, 175 Ill. App. 3d 184, 189 (1988). It follows that what is in the best interests of the child cannot be considered without assessing the best interests of the other members of the household in which the child resides, most particularly the custodial parent.

  4. In re Marriage of Slavish

    2015 Ill. App. 4th 150427 (Ill. App. Ct. 2015)

    ¶ 39 Indeed, there is a difference between a custody award under section 602 and removal under section 609. In re Marriage of Taylor, 202 Ill. App. 3d 740, 744, 559 N.E.2d 1150, 1154 (1990) ("[a] judge is required to hear two different types of evidence and must be careful not to allow evidence proper for one petition to impact upon the decision as to the other petition"). "

  5. In re Marriage of Creedon

    245 Ill. App. 3d 531 (Ill. App. Ct. 1993)   Cited 11 times

    Whatever other remedies respondent may have, however, it is clear that petitions for leave to remove are governed by section 609 of the Act, despite the fact that joint custody has been agreed to or awarded. ( In re Marriage of Yndestad (1992), 232 Ill. App.3d 1, 7, 597 N.E.2d 215, 219; In re Marriage of Taylor (1990), 202 Ill. App.3d 740, 744, 559 N.E.2d 1150, 1152.) Still, to the extent that an order of joint custody actually reflects a closer than customary relationship between the noncustodian and the child, the existence of a joint custody order may be considered in determining whether removal is in a child's best interests.

  6. In re Marriage of Miroballi

    589 N.E.2d 565 (Ill. App. Ct. 1991)   Cited 2 times

    This court has consistently recognized that where the general quality of life for the custodial parent is enhanced the child's quality of life is indirectly enhanced. In re Marriage of Carlson (1991), 216 Ill. App.3d 1077, 1081; In re Marriage of Taylor (1990), 202 Ill. App.3d 740, 745; In re Marriage of Zamarripa-Gesundheit (1988), 175 Ill. App.3d 184, 189; In re Custody of Arquilla (1980), 85 Ill. App.3d 1090, 1093. Having acknowledged that petitioner will be happier by moving, it is reasonable to conclude that the children's lives will be indirectly enhanced.

  7. In re Marriage of Benson

    577 N.E.2d 867 (Ill. App. Ct. 1991)   Cited 4 times

    On appeal, Vicki initially argues that the trial court erred in conducting a joint evidentiary hearing on the two petitions and ruling on Loren's petition to modify before ruling on Vicki's petition to remove. In support of her position, Vicki relies on In re Marriage of Taylor (1990), 202 Ill. App.3d 740, 559 N.E.2d 1150. In Taylor, the father's petition for a change in physical custody was predicated upon the mother's anticipated move to Virginia.

  8. In re Marriage of Carlson

    216 Ill. App. 3d 1077 (Ill. App. Ct. 1991)   Cited 11 times

    However, it is necessary to also consider indirect benefits to the children from the proposed move. The present case is similar to In re Marriage of Taylor (1990), 202 Ill. App.3d 740, 559 N.E.2d 1150. In that case a mother wished to move from Illinois to Virginia to be near her new husband, who was in the United States Navy, and whose ship was based at Norfolk, Virginia.

  9. In re Marriage of Berk

    215 Ill. App. 3d 459 (Ill. App. Ct. 1991)   Cited 25 times
    Affirming denial of request to remove children to Canada to live with the mother and her new husband where the removal would result in the father having 18% fewer days of visitation, most members of the children's extended family resided in Illinois, the Canadian and American education systems differed, the children barely knew the mother's new husband, transportation between Illinois and Canada would be limited and expensive, and the mother would be employed at essentially the same income as in Illinois

    We are unaware of how Karen gained this insight and furthermore note that this court based its decision on the evidence present in the record, not on a secret motivation of one of the parties. Karen also cites In re Marriage of Taylor (1990), 202 Ill. App.3d 740, and In re Marriage of Zamarripa-Gesundheit (1988), 175 Ill. App.3d 184, two cases which do rely to a great extent on the reasoning that a positive effect on the custodial parent's quality of life, which indirectly enhances the children's quality of life, is enough to prove the move to be in the child's best interest. For example, in Zamarripa-Gesundheit, the court stated: