In re Marriage of Kalis, 2022 IL App (2d) 210434-U

- Case citation and parties
In re Marriage of Kalis, No. 2-21-0434, 2022 IL App (2d) 210434-U (Ill. App. Ct. 2d Dist. Sept. 21, 2022) (Rule 23 order). Petitioner‑Appellant: Todd Kalis. Respondent‑Appellee: Hyeok Kalis.

- Key legal issues
1. Whether the trial court abused its discretion by denying Todd’s 735 ILCS 5/2‑1401 motion to vacate a default judgment entered on Hyeok’s counter‑petition for dissolution without holding an evidentiary hearing.
2. Whether service/notice to Todd (counsel withdrawal, last known address and email, certified/regular mail, FedEx) and the prove‑up procedures satisfied due process.
3. Whether Todd alleged sufficient diligence and a meritorious defense to warrant relief from the default judgment.

- Holding/outcome
The appellate court affirmed. The trial court did not err in denying the 2‑1401 petition and in declining an evidentiary hearing.

- Significant legal reasoning (concise)
The court emphasized procedural prerequisites for relief from default under 2‑1401: a moving party must plead facts showing due diligence in pursuing relief, circumstances excusing the default, and a meritorious defense. Todd’s motion contained only conclusory assertions of “various meritorious defenses” (dissipation, health, inability to work) without affidavits or detailed factual support. The record demonstrated repeated notices and court orders sent to Todd’s last known mailing address and email, multiple court appearances via Zoom with counsel present, and that Todd’s counsel had been granted leave to withdraw with instructions that Todd file a pro se appearance or retain new counsel. The trial court had also conducted a prove‑up hearing at which Hyeok presented testimony and documentary matters supporting her counter‑petition. Given the inadequate factual showing in Todd’s 2‑1401 petition and the evidence of reasonable notice, the court concluded there was no legal error in denying relief or in refusing to hold an evidentiary hearing on a conclusory motion.

- Practice implications for family-law practitioners
- When withdrawing, counsel must ensure clients receive explicit notice of upcoming dates and the consequences of failing to appear; document all attempts to contact the client.
- A 2‑1401 motion to vacate a default requires fact‑specific affidavits showing due diligence, excusable neglect, and a concrete meritorious defense — conclusory allegations are routinely denied without hearing.
- Service to a litigant’s last known address and email, plus certified/regular mail and notice on the docket, may satisfy due process; clients should be warned that courts will enforce default prove‑ups when proper notice is shown.
- Preserve and submit detailed evidence (timeline, communications, medical or employment records) if asserting incapacity or inability to participate as grounds for relief.