Essential Insights for Families This Winter 💜

The Child & Family Law Center

A Division of Grund & Leavitt LLP

600 Central Ave Suite 248, Highland Park, IL 60035 312-640-0500

NEWSLETTER

Winter 2026

~ In this Issue ~

Message from Micki Moran

What We Do

Special Education Issues:

Preparing for Your Annual Review

Dyslexia/Specific Learning Disability: The Science of Reading

Family Law:

Clarification on the Change of Circumstances Requirement

in Illinois Custody Cases

Illinois Relocation Law — Key Points for Practitioners Governing Statute

MESSAGE FROM MICKI MORAN

What we do: Our practice is devoted to children and their families in a variety of legal situations. For many of the families, they seek representation in times of crisis or struggle with a variety of systems, family law, special education, juvenile and mental health, and accusations of neglect and abuse that may be under investigation by the Department of Children and Family Services.

Over the past thirty years it has been our experience that many of these issues overlap and often require representation in multiple settings. From the beginning our focus has been to utilize a multi-disciplinary approach to advocacy. We work as a team with psychologists, psychiatrists, medical professionals, and therapists to carve out legal solutions that work for our clients. This representation takes place in a variety of forums, including state and federal court, due process and administrative hearings. Litigation in certain cases is a necessary option to secure the legal relief our clients need.

Areas of Practice: Special Education, School Discipline (including bullying), Family Law, Juvenile Law, DCFS Defense, Mental Health Law, Guardianship. Please call our office for your consultation at (312)-640-0500, mmoran@grundlaw.com.

Reynolds v Reynolds, a clarification on the change of circumstances requirement in Illinois custody cases

In a noteworthy family law decision announced on November 24, 2025, the Illinois Appellate Court issued its opinion in Reynolds v. Reynolds, 2025 IL App (2d) 240028, addressing the standard a trial court must apply when a parent seeks to modify parenting time in the context of an ongoing dispute involving parental responsibilities and relocation-related considerations. Illinois State Bar Association

Case Background

The dispute between Nancy Reynolds (petitioner/appellee) and Christopher I. Reynolds, Sr. (respondent/appellant) arose from a long-standing custody and support case in McHenry County. The parties are the parents of two daughters born in 2012 and 2014, whose parental allocation and parenting time schedules were originally established in 2016. Over time, the relationship between the parties remained contentious, and in November 2021, Mr. Reynolds filed a motion seeking extensive changes to the existing allocation of parental responsibilities—most significantly, an increase in his parenting time and modification of the existing arrangement. Illinois Courts Audio

At the circuit court level, the trial judge granted a directed finding in favor of Ms. Reynolds on Mr. Reynolds’s motion to modify, effectively denying his request for increased parenting time. The respondent challenged that ruling on appeal, arguing that the trial court applied the incorrect legal standard in evaluating his motion.

Appellate Court’s Ruling

The Illinois Appellate Court agreed with Mr. Reynolds that the trial court misapplied the relevant statutory standard. Under Section 610.5(a) of the Illinois Marriage and Dissolution of Marriage Act (IMDMA), a parent seeking a modification solely of parenting time need not show a substantial change in circumstances. Rather, the statute’s plain language indicates that only a simple change in circumstances that makes modification necessary to serve the child’s best interests must be shown.

The court explained that the trial court had incorrectly applied the heavier “substantial change” standard, which is typically associated with modifications to allocations of parental responsibilities. Because the trial court evaluated the evidence under the incorrect framework, the appellate court vacated the directed finding and remanded the case for further proceedings consistent with the correct legal standard. Illinois State Bar AssociationThe decision was authored by Justice Mullen, with a concurrence from Justice Schostok and a dissenting opinion from Justice Birkett. Illinois State Bar Association

What This Means for Relocation and Parenting Time Practice

Although Reynolds v. Reynolds does not directly decide a relocation request, the appellate opinion has important implications for family law practitioners dealing with relocation disputes in Illinois:

Relocation petitions (under 750 ILCS 5/609.2) often hinge on modifications of parenting time structures if a custodial parent wishes to move beyond certain distance thresholds. Courts must determine whether existing schedules should be adjusted to reflect new realities if the move is approved.
The Reynolds ruling reinforces that when a parent seeks to change only parenting time—even in the context of broader disputes such as relocation—the lower threshold of changed circumstances applies. This distinction can materially affect when and how parents bring modification motions, particularly as relocation issues often trigger requests to revisit parenting time schedules.

Illinois law requires parents who wish to relocate with children beyond statutory distance limits to provide notice and, if court approval is contested, demonstrate that the move and any related schedule changes serve the children’s best interests. Relocation cases remain fact-specific and often involve a careful weighing of best-interest factors, including how any modification of parenting time will support the child’s relationship with each parent.

Practice Tip

Family law practitioners should carefully evaluate the nature of a modification request—whether it seeks a change in parenting time alone or also alters legal responsibilities—as this will determine the applicable statutory threshold under Section 610.5. The Reynolds decision underscores the importance of framing the pleading and evidence in light of the appropriate legal standard to avoid reversible error.

Illinois State Bar Association

SIDEBAR: Illinois Relocation Law — Key Points for Practitioners Governing Statute: 750 ILCS 5/609.2 (Illinois Marriage and Dissolution of Marriage Act)

What Counts as a “Relocation”?

A parent with equal or majority parenting time must seek court approval to relocate with a child beyond these statutory limits:

25 miles from the child’s current primary residence if moving within Cook, DuPage, Kane, Lake, McHenry, or Will Counties
50 miles if moving within Illinois but outside those counties
Out of Illinois, regardless of distance

Relocation is measured from the child’s current primary residence, not from the relocating parent’s address.

Notice Requirements

A parent intending to relocate must provide at least 60 days’ written notice to the other parent, unless excused by the court. The notice must include:

The intended relocation address
The date of the proposed move
The duration of the relocation (if not permanent)

Failure to provide proper notice can weigh against the relocating parent in court.

Burden of Proof

The relocating parent bears the burden of proving that the proposed relocation is in the child’s best interests.
The court evaluates relocation independently from — but often alongside — parenting time modification requests.

Best-Interest Factors Considered

Section 609.2(g) directs courts to consider, among other factors:

The reason for the proposed relocation
The reason for opposition to the relocation
The history and quality of each parent’s relationship with the child
Educational opportunities at the current and proposed locations
The impact on parenting time and each parent’s ability to maintain a meaningful relationship with the child
Whether a reasonable parenting time schedule can be fashioned post-relocation

No single factor is controlling.

Interaction with Parenting Time Modifications

Relocation cases frequently require restructuring parenting time, even if parental responsibilities remain unchanged. As reinforced by Reynolds v. Reynolds, when a party seeks only a modification of parenting time, the applicable standard under Section 610.5(a) is a change in circumstances, not a “substantial change.” Correctly identifying the nature of the requested relief is critical.

Practice Pointer

When litigating relocation cases:

Clearly distinguish between relocation approval and parenting time modification
Plead the applicable statutory standard with precision
Be prepared to present evidence on transportation logistics, school calendars, and realistic parenting schedules post-move

Preparing for Your Annual Review

This is the time of year when annual reviews are being scheduled and transition meetings for students aging out of the school system or moving from middle school to high school. This tends to be a busy time of year for school districts and attorneys. Over the years, I have developed a number of checklists which I find helpful in approaching IEP meetings egardless of the reason. The checklist which is meant as a reference is a start to being prepared.

1. Present Levels of Performance in all areas. This is an important starting point since it sets the stage for the entire IEP.

a. Should be data driven. ( How is progress being measured?)

b. Does everyone agree on the present levels.

c. What assessments were used to arrive at the present level.

d. Are additional evaluations necessary.

2. Goals

a. Has the student made progress?

b. How is that progress being measured?

c. Is the goal realistic and based on the student’s needs?

d. Is the goal able to be measured using data?

e. Who is taking the data?

f. How frequently will this data be taken?

g. Are the benchmarks and short-term objectives aligned with the annual goal?

h. Have the progress reports provided accurate data?

3. Specifically Designed Instruction

a. Type of Specifically Designed Instruction (e.g. specially designed reading instruction)

b. Where will this instruction take place?( e.g.in the classroom, resource room)

c. What is the frequency of the intervention. (e.g. two times per week)

d. Who is delivering the instruction?

e. How many other students are also in this group?

4. Supplementary aids and services

a. Accommodations- extended time, frequent breaks are examples.

b. When will these accommodations be provided ( general education and other settings)

c. Assistive Technology.

d. Modifications.

e. All of these should be detailed in the IEP and the how, what, when and where should be clearly defined.

5. Students with Behavioral Needs

a. Is an updated Functional Behavioral Analysis Needed?

b. Does the Behavioral Intervention Plan need revised?

c. Is so, Why?

d. Has the student made progress?

e. If not, why not?

6. Transition Plan

a. In Illinois transition planning is part of the IEP beginning at age 14.5. This is a central focus on special education and all goals should focus on outcomes for a student.

b. What do you see your child or young adult doing after high school?

c. What skills do they need to acquire to make that plan happen?

d. What are the priorities for the school year?

DYSLEXIA/SPECIFIC LEARNING DISABILITY: The Science of Reading

Although I generally do no share my story, over the past several months I have represented a number of clients with children who have been diagnosed with dyslexia. This is a journey I am familiar with since my now adult son was diagnosed with dyslexia at age 6. This diagnosis changed my career path and led to my desire to shift from a corporate legal practice to representing children with disabilities. This is my thirtieth year representing students with disabilities among the other aspects of my law practice. Despite much research and quite frankly none of it new or groundbreaking, there is an ongoing debate about what is the most efficacious research -based interventions for students with dyslexia. Much of the “ debate” comes from the school district side of the discussion. Fortunately, there are far more resources and options for parents. Advocacy and knowledge is the key to making sure students receive appropriate interventions.

Resources:

Dyslexia- Handbook.pdf#search=dyslexia

www.understood.org

The Yale Center for Dyslexia and Creativity: https://dyslexia.yale.edu/

Our office is dedicated to advocating for the best outcomes for children and families. Call (312)-640-9850 or email me at mmoran@grundlaw.com. Consultations for special education and family law issues are available in person or by Zoom.

Micki Moran

The Child & Family Law Center of the North Shore

A Division of Grund & Leavitt, LLP

600 Central Avenue, Suite 248

Highland Park, IL 60035

Phone 312-640-0500

Fax 847-681-1295

Grund & Leavitt, LLP

www.lawforchild.com

www.specialneedsdivorceillinois.com

Special Education Law Blog

Kid's Law Blog