In re Marriage of Armstrong, 2021 IL App (3d) 200278-U

1. Case citation and parties
- In re Marriage of Armstrong, 2021 IL App (3d) 200278-U (Dec. 23, 2021).
- Petitioner-Appellee: Glen M. Armstrong, Sr.; Respondent-Appellant: Courtney D. Armstrong.
- Note: Order filed under Ill. S. Ct. R. 23 — nonprecedential, limited citation.

2. Key legal issues
- Whether the appellate court had jurisdiction to hear an appeal filed immediately after a circuit court’s instanter order returning custody but expressly continuing the case for a status hearing to determine visitation and other rights.
- Whether an order that grants immediate custody but leaves other parenting-time/custody matters pending constitutes a final, appealable order (or requires a Rule 304(a) certification or other interlocutory basis).

3. Holding/outcome
- Appeal dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. The Third District found the circuit court’s order was not final and appealable because matters remained pending; no Rule 304(a) finding or other basis for interlocutory review was tendered.

4. Significant legal reasoning
- The court reiterated the sua sponte duty to examine jurisdiction. Jurisdiction is confined to final judgments unless a Supreme Court rule or statute permits interlocutory review (citing In re Marriage of Morgan and In re A.M.).
- Although the trial judge ordered immediate turnover of the child to Glen, the court explicitly continued the case to a later date to address Courtney’s compliance and visitation rights. Because the order did not resolve all the merits between the parties (it left visitation/custody issues unresolved), it was not final and appealable.
- The appellant filed two notices of appeal without identifying any Supreme Court Rule basis for interlocutory review; no Rule 304(a) certification was sought or entered. The Court therefore lacked a cognizable basis to exercise jurisdiction and dismissed the appeal.

5. Practice implications (for family-law practitioners)
- Do not file a notice of appeal from an order that leaves substantive issues pending; confirm the order is final or obtain an express Rule 304(a) finding (no just reason for delay) before appealing.
- If the trial court intends an immediate enforcement remedy but will continue other issues, seek clarification or an amended written order resolving all claims or a certification that the order is final for appeal.
- When filing an appeal, state the jurisdictional basis (rule/statute) in the notice of appeal. If seeking interlocutory review, pursue the appropriate procedural vehicle (certification, leave, or Supreme Court rule) rather than premature appeal.
- Remember appellate briefing and merits review are moot if jurisdictional prerequisites are not satisfied; courts will dismiss sua sponte.