The case began in November 2020, when DCFS took the four children — born between 2011 and 2017 — into protective custody after their mother failed to comply with services designed to prevent foster care placement. The children were adjudicated neglected by injurious environment. Over the next five years, the mother cycled through five appointed attorneys, repeatedly failed to engage with required reunification services including therapy, psychiatric evaluation, and parent coaching, and largely stopped visiting the children after May 2024. The State filed termination petitions in November 2024, alleging the mother failed to demonstrate a reasonable degree of interest, concern, or responsibility for the children and failed to make reasonable progress toward their return during multiple nine-month periods.
Two days before the June 26, 2025, unfitness hearing, the mother's fifth attorney, Kat Delgado, moved to withdraw, citing inability to effectively represent the mother due to lack of communication and cooperation. The trial court, presided over by Judge Lisa M. Taylor, granted the motion but immediately appointed Delgado as standby counsel and proceeded with the hearing that same day. The mother had previously been told that Delgado would be the last attorney the court would appoint.
The Illinois Appellate Court, First District, held that the trial court abused its discretion by granting the withdrawal without complying with Illinois Supreme Court Rule 13, which requires reasonable notice to the client and a 21-day period to obtain substitute counsel. The State conceded the error. But the court held that the error did not require reversal, applying the three-factor balancing test from Mathews v. Eldridge to the due process claim.
On the Mathews analysis, the court weighed the mother's fundamental parental interest against the children's interest in permanency, the risk of erroneous deprivation given Delgado's appointment as standby counsel, and the State's interest in avoiding further delay. The court noted that the children had been in DCFS care for over five years, that appointing a sixth attorney would have been of no value given the mother's history of noncooperation, and that Delgado — who had represented the mother since November 2024 and was familiar with the case — performed the full duties of appointed counsel throughout the proceedings, including cross-examining witnesses, presenting the mother as a witness, making objections, and delivering closing arguments at both the unfitness and best interest hearings.
On the best interest challenge, the court affirmed under the manifest weight of the evidence standard. All four children were placed in pre-adoptive homes with maternal aunts, had expressed a desire to be adopted, and were described as thriving. DCFS caseworker Tiffany Heard testified that the mother had not visited the children since May 2024 and that, despite attempting over 20 times to contact the mother by email and telephone, the mother occasionally responded but never addressed the issue of visits or resuming contact with the children. The court acknowledged that two of the younger children expressed willingness to have some contact with the mother, but noted they no longer asked to see her.
The opinion was decided without oral argument under Illinois Supreme Court Rule 352(a) and is subject to the expedited procedures of Rule 311(a). Appellant was represented by Suzanne Isaacson of Oak Park.