In re Polovchak

97 Ill. 2d 212, 73 Ill. Dec. 398, 454 N.E.2d 212 (1983)

From our private database of 46,000+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

In re Polovchak

Illinois Supreme Court
97 Ill. 2d 212, 73 Ill. Dec. 398, 454 N.E.2d 212 (1983)

Facts

Michael and Anna Polovchak and their three children, including Walter (defendant), who was 12 years old, and Natalie, who was 17 years old, came to the United States from Ukraine in January 1980. After a few months, Michael and Anna decided to return to Ukraine with their children, but Walter and Natalie wanted to stay in the United States and live with their cousin. Michael agreed that Natalie could stay but did not agree to allow Walter to stay. Natalie moved to the cousin’s apartment, and Walter ran away from home. The police found Walter at his cousin’s apartment and brought Walter to the police station. Walter told the police that he wanted to stay in the United States instead of returning to Ukraine with Michael and Anna. The police released Walter to Natalie. A police officer filed a petition asking the court to find that Walter’s parents could not control him, that Walter had run away from home, and that it was in Walter’s best interests to be adjudicated a ward of the court. Michael and Anna asked the court to return Walter to them. There was no evidence that Walter would face any danger if he were returned to Michael and Anna. The court issued an order stating that Walter’s removal from his parents’ custody was “a matter of immediate and urgent necessity for Walter’s protection” and placed Walter in the temporary custody of the Illinois Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS). The court later deemed Walter a ward of the court, leaving his temporary custody with DCFS, and allowing Michael and Anna to have supervised visits. Michael and Anna filed an interlocutory appeal. The court of appeals reversed the trial court’s ruling, and Walter appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Underwood, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 742,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 742,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,000 briefs, keyed to 986 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 742,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,000 briefs - keyed to 986 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership