In re Marriage of Scott

- Case citation and parties
In re Marriage of Scott, 2025 IL App (4th) 250776-U (Ill. App. Ct., 4th Dist. Dec. 9, 2025) (Rule 23 non‑precedential). Petitioner-Appellee: Stuart A. Scott. Respondent-Appellant (pro se): Delilah R. Scott. Trial court modified allocation of parental responsibilities and awarded primary decision-making/majority custody to petitioner.

- Key legal issues
1) Whether appellant’s pro se appellate brief complied with Illinois Supreme Court Rule 341 such that the court could review claimed trial-court errors (parenting-time/decision-making modifications).
2) Whether appellant’s failure to provide a report of proceedings/transcript (and her fee-waiver request history) required any different treatment.
3) Whether pro se status excuses compliance with briefing and record requirements.

- Holding/outcome
The Fourth District struck respondent’s appellate brief and dismissed the appeal for failure to comply with Rule 341. The court also took judicial notice of the trial-court docket entry reflecting a 25% waiver of transcript fees and rejected appellant’s unsubstantiated claim that she was entitled to a full fee waiver.

- Significant legal reasoning
The court emphasized that Rule 341’s requirements (table of contents; introductory paragraph; statement of issues; statement of jurisdiction; a fair statement of facts with record citations; and an argument with legal authority and record cites) are mandatory, and pro se litigants are held to the same standards as attorneys. The respondent’s brief lacked the required components and meaningful citation/analysis; it merely listed statutes and rules without applying them. While the absence of a report of proceedings limited review, most briefing defects were independent of the missing transcript. The court exercised its discretion to impose the harsh sanction of dismissal when briefing deficiencies hinder meaningful review. The court also noted the record lacked proof supporting appellant’s entitlement to a full waiver under the public-benefit fee-waiver statute (735 ILCS 5/5-105), and that the docket reflected only a 25% waiver.

- Practice implications (concise)
- Pro se litigants must comply strictly with Rule 341; courts will strike briefs and dismiss appeals for substantial noncompliance.
- Assemble a complete appellate record (transcript or an approved fee waiver) before relying on appellate review; if fee waiver is denied or limited, consider immediate, separate appeal or motions to the trial court and include proof in the record.
- Appellate briefs must state issues clearly, cite record pages and controlling authority, and present coherent legal argument—mere citation lists won’t suffice.
- For high-stakes family matters, counsel or appellate assistance is strongly advised to avoid procedural forfeiture.