In re Marriage of Lee
Court: Illinois Appellate Court | Published: 5/27/2025
Marriage
Quick Summary:
<h3>Case Summary: 2025 IL App (1st) 241564 -U</h3>
<strong>Case Number:</strong> No. 1-24-1564<br>
<strong>Date Filed:</strong> May 27, 2025<br>
<strong>Court:</strong> Appellate Court of Illinois, F...
Full Case Summary
Case Summary: 2025 IL App (1st) 241564 -U
Case Number: No. 1-24-1564Date Filed: May 27, 2025
Court: Appellate Court of Illinois, First District
Parties Involved
Petitioner-Appellee: Antoinette Jameica LeeRespondent-Appellant: Steven Jermaine Lee (also referred to as "Bro. S Lee Bey")
Lower Court: Circuit Court of Cook County (No. 21 D 8586)
Presiding Judge: Hon. D. Renee Jackson
Background
Petitioner and respondent were married on December 11, 1999, with the petitioner filing for dissolution of marriage on October 4, 2021. The respondent had initially engaged counsel, who withdrew on December 20, 2023. Subsequently, the petitioner filed for default on February 23, 2024, due to the respondent's non-response or failure to obtain new counsel.Trial Court Finding
On July 3, 2024, after a trial, the court granted the petitioner’s dissolution petition in the absence of the respondent, citing inadequate representation and evidence presented. The respondent later filed a motion to vacate the judgment on July 29, 2024, claiming authority through an individual named Prophet Noble Drew Ali, however, this claim was dismissed due to lack of proper credentials.Judgment
The Appellate Court affirmed the trial court's judgment, stating that the respondent failed to present sufficient evidence to demonstrate any errors in the lower court's decision. The appeal alleged that the trial court wrongfully entered "summary judgment" without addressing jurisdictional claims; however, the respondent's arguments lacked the requisite supporting documentation.Jurisdictional Issues
The respondent raised questions regarding the court's jurisdiction over a private religious trust and alleged due process violations, which he claimed were unaddressed. However, these challenges were largely deemed forfeited due to non-compliance with Illinois Supreme Court Rule 341, as the respondent's arguments lacked cohesion and referenced unrecorded documents.Legal Principles
The court clarified that only licensed attorneys may represent parties in legal matters, thus any motions filed by non-attorneys, including the motion to vacate, are treated as ineffective. The failure to provide a complete transcript or documentation from trial proceedings significantly hampered the respondent's ability to substantiate claims of error, affirming the lower court’s judgment per established legal standards.Conclusion
The Appellate Court upheld the dissolution judgment, reinforcing the trial court's authority and the presumed correctness of its findings due to lack of comprehensive record from the appellant. In absence of evidence challenging the trial court's ruling, the judgment remains affirmed.Ask AI About This Case
Have a specific question about In re Marriage of Lee? Ask our AI assistant below.