In re Marriage of Sokolski, 2023 IL App (1st) 220744-U

1. Case citation and parties
- In re Marriage of Sokolski, No. 1-22-0744, 2023 IL App (1st) 220744-U (Ill. App. Ct., 1st Dist. Oct. 30, 2023). (Rule 23 order; non-precedential except as allowed by Rule 23(e)(1)).
- Petitioner-Appellant: Yokfa Sokolski. Respondent-Appellee: Lawrence Sokolski.

2. Key legal issues
- Whether the appellate court had jurisdiction to hear an appeal from (a) the circuit court’s April 26, 2021 orders temporarily modifying parenting time and appointing a guardian ad litem (GAL), and (b) the April 26, 2022 order denying petitioner’s motion to vacate those April 2021 orders.
- Related procedural issues: finality of custody orders, timeliness of appeal, adequacy of pleadings and notice when parenting time is modified.

3. Holding / Outcome
- Appeal dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. The April 26, 2021 orders were interlocutory/temporary (not final or intended to dispose of the litigation) and therefore not appealable. The appellate court did not reach the merits of petitioner’s due-process and jurisdictional challenges.

4. Significant legal reasoning
- Finality principle: Illinois appellate jurisdiction generally extends only to final judgments (In re Marriage of Verdung; R.W. Dunteman). Whether an order is final depends on substance, not labels. Temporary custody adjustments intended to protect children and to be revisited are not final.
- The April 26, 2021 orders expressly provided temporary residency with father, appointment of a GAL, and a continued status setting to address residential care, video parenting time, and an open DCFS case — indicating interlocutory relief. The court thus concluded the orders did not terminate rights or end the litigation.
- Appellant’s notice of appeal (filed May 24, 2022) could not create jurisdiction over an interlocutory order. The appellate court also noted procedural shortcomings in the record (missing transcripts) but emphasized its independent duty to determine jurisdiction.

5. Practice implications (for family law attorneys)
- Carefully evaluate and document whether a custody/parenting-time order is final or expressly temporary. If you intend an order to be appealable, seek a Rule 304(a) certification or an express final adjudication of the custody issue.
- If attacking a temporary custody order, consider emergency relief (e.g., supervisory writ/mandamus) or ensure timely postjudgment motions that will preserve appellate deadlines.
- Preserve a complete record (transcripts) of hearings where custody or parental-responsibility changes are made; an incomplete record can impede review.
- When asserting lack of pleadings or due-process defects, ensure the record shows the absence of a proper motion or that adequate notice was denied — but recognize jurisdictional finality will often be the threshold bar to appellate review.