The parties are in court for a hearing for a two year order of protection.   The mother testified to two specific fact patterns that did not appear in her underlying petition.   (1) that the father had pushed their son into a wall.   And, (2) that the father hit their son in thehead with a cell phone.

The trial court issued a one year order of protection.  Father appealed.  He argued that mother testified to facts that were not in her petition.  He argued that she should not have been able to testify as to acts not contained in her underlying petition.

The appellate court affirmed.Section 214 of the Domestic Violence Act, 750 ILCS 60/101, is the law.  It provides for determining whether to grant an order of protection.  The trial court shall consider the nature, frequency, severity, pattern, and consequences of the respondent’s past abuse.  Of petitioner or any family or household member. As well as the danger that any minor child will be abused.

Therefore, the trial court was allowed to consider the evidence that the respondent had recently pushed the child.   And hit him in the head with a cell phone.   The court was required to do so.

Sandberg v. Brian B., 2018 IL App (2d) 180082.