In re Marriage of Jamison-Batts, 2022 IL App (1st) 220334-U

1) Case citation and parties
- In re Marriage of Jamison-Batts, 2022 IL App (1st) 220334‑U (1st Dist. Aug. 19, 2022) (Rule 23 order; not precedent except as allowed by Rule 23(e)(1)).
- Petitioner‑Appellee: Tiffany Jamison‑Batts. Respondent‑Appellant: Allen Batts.

2) Key legal issues
- Whether the Appellate Court had jurisdiction to hear Batts’ appeal from trial court orders concerning parenting time and related interlocutory matters.
- Whether an interlocutory family‑law order affecting parental responsibilities is appealable without following Illinois Supreme Court Rule 306 procedures.

3) Holding/outcome
- Appeal dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. The February 3, 2022 trial court order was not final, and Batts failed to seek leave to appeal under Ill. S. Ct. R. 306(a)(5)/(b) within the required 14‑day period.

4) Significant legal reasoning (concise)
- Finality: The court applied the well‑established final‑judgment principle — appellate review generally limited to final orders that dispose of all claims or a definite/separate part of the controversy (citing Verdung, O’Gara, Kostusik). The February 3 order resolved some items (e.g., payment directives, certain rulings) but expressly left key matters pending: Batts’ petition for rule to show cause (contempt), his motion to disqualify the family counselor, and the mother’s motion to enforce. Because material rights and issues remained, the order was not final.
- Interlocutory remedy: Although Rule 306(a)(5) permits leave to appeal interlocutory orders affecting care/custody/parental responsibilities, Rule 306(b) imposes jurisdictional requirements: a petition for leave to appeal must be filed in the appellate court within 14 days of the order (with an authenticated supporting record and optionally a memorandum). Batts did not file the required petition — he filed a conventional notice of appeal (March 4, 2022) — so appellate jurisdiction never vested. The court emphasized strict compliance with appellate filing rules (citing Clark v. Han and In re Alexis H.).

5) Practice implications (practical takeaways for attorneys)
- Treat orders affecting parenting time and allocation of parental responsibilities as potentially interlocutory but appealable only via Rule 306(a)(5). File a Rule 306 petition in the appellate court within 14 days, with the authenticated record, or risk dismissal for lack of jurisdiction.
- Verify finality before relying on a notice of appeal: if material claims remain, you must pursue Rule 306 relief or await a final order.
- Preserve and consolidate issues strategically: when litigation yields multiple, staggered orders, ensure appellate strategy accounts for procedural prerequisites and timelines.
- Note the opinion is Rule 23 non‑precedential; reasoning is persuasive on procedure but not binding precedent.