In re Custody of J.K., 2021 IL App (1st) 1200062-U

- Case citation and parties
In re Custody of J.K. & C.K., 2021 IL App (1st) 1200062-U (1st Dist. July 9, 2021) (Rule 23 non‑precedential). Petitioner-Appellee: Alex K.; Respondent-Appellant: Lauren D.

- Key legal issues
1) Whether the trial court erred in denying Lauren’s motion to reconsider the denial of her emergency order of protection (OOP).
2) Whether the trial court erred in dismissing Lauren’s motion to vacate the September 15, 2017 default judgment allocating parental responsibilities.

- Holding / outcome
The appellate court affirmed. The OOP reconsideration claim was moot; the dismissal of the motion to vacate the default judgment was affirmed for failure to state a cause of action.

- Significant legal reasoning (concise)
- Mootness: The court concluded there was no justiciable controversy regarding the emergency OOP because the alleged emergency events occurred nearly three years earlier, Lauren had not sought a plenary order in the interim, and she admitted uncertainty in December 2019 about any ongoing danger. Without an ongoing need for emergency relief, the appellate court could not grant effective relief.
- Motion to vacate/default: The record showed a default allocation judgment entered September 2017 after Lauren failed to appear/respond. The court relied on evidence that Lauren learned of the default (texts from opposing party and an emailed judgment certificate) well before she filed to vacate in August 2019. Her motion lacked supporting affidavits and did not adequately plead diligence, a meritorious defense, or procedural infirmities sufficient to state a cause of action to set aside the default. The trial court’s dismissal therefore was proper. The trial court also observed that a motion to modify the judgment might have been a more appropriate remedy.

- Practice implications for family-law attorneys
- Vigilance on notice/service: Confirm clients receive and monitor contact methods used for service (including former work e-mail addresses); verify mailing/service if counsel withdraws. Default judgments are unforgiving when a client receives notice but delays.
- Timeliness and proof of diligence: Prompt action and supporting affidavits are critical when seeking vacatur of default orders—plead and prove diligence, meritorious defense, and service defects.
- Remedy choice: If substantial time has passed since a default allocation, consider a motion to modify (change allocation) rather than vacatur if vacatur grounds are weak.
- Emergency OOP strategy: Preserve issues—if emergency relief is denied, promptly pursue plenary relief or other protection; otherwise the claim risks mootness on appeal.