In re Marriage of Dabrowska, 2022 IL App (1st) 211195-U

1. Case citation and parties
- In re Marriage of Dabrowska, 2022 IL App (1st) 211195-U (1st Dist. June 9, 2022) (Rule 23 order).
- Petitioner-Appellee: Urszula Dabrowska. Respondent-Appellant: Jacek Dabrowski.

2. Key legal issues
- Whether the appellate court had jurisdiction to review the trial court’s denial of a petition under 735 ILCS 5/2‑1401 seeking to vacate maintenance contained in a marital settlement agreement.
- Timeliness and effect of postjudgment motions (motion to reconsider) and notices of appeal in the context of a 2‑1401 proceeding.

3. Holding/outcome
- Appeal dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. The appellant’s postjudgment motion to reconsider was untimely (filed more than 30 days after the March 4, 2021 final denial of the 2‑1401 petition), and his later notice of appeal did not properly invoke appellate jurisdiction.

4. Significant legal reasoning
- A section 2‑1401 petition is a separate, independent action and a final order disposing of it is appealable (Ill. S. Ct. R. 304(b)). A timely motion to reconsider directed at that judgment will toll the 30‑day appeal period (Ill. S. Ct. R. 303(a)(1)).
- The trial court entered a final written denial of the 2‑1401 petition on March 4, 2021. The appellant did not file a notice of appeal or a timely motion to reconsider within 30 days. His April 15 motion was therefore untimely and the trial court lacked jurisdiction to entertain it. A March 16 order stating the petition was not a motion to modify maintenance did not restart the 30‑day clock because it was not a disposition of the 2‑1401 judgment.
- Appellate courts have an independent duty to assess jurisdiction; without a timely notice of appeal or timely postjudgment motion, the reviewing court must dismiss (citing authority on jurisdictional nature of appeal timing).

5. Practice implications (concise)
- Treat denials of 2‑1401 petitions as final orders for appeal deadlines: file a notice of appeal or a timely motion to reconsider within 30 days.
- If seeking modification of maintenance, use the correct procedural vehicle (motion to modify) rather than relying on or re‑labeling a 2‑1401 petition.
- Preserve the record (transcripts, bystander’s report) to show what occurred at hearings that might affect appealability or tolling.
- Ensure 2‑1401 petitions contain required allegations (meritorious claim/defense, due diligence) and supporting affidavits; language barriers or pro se status do not excuse missed deadlines.