In re Parentage of D.C.
Court: Illinois Appellate Court | Published: 2/10/2025
Parentage
Quick Summary:
```html
<h3>Case Overview</h3>
<strong>Title:</strong> In re Parentage of D.C. <br>
<strong>Case Number:</strong> 2025 IL App (1st) 2 40904 -U No. 1-24-0904 <br>
<strong>Order Filed:</strong> February...
Full Case Summary
```html
Case Overview
Title: In re Parentage of D.C.Case Number: 2025 IL App (1st) 2 40904 -U No. 1-24-0904
Order Filed: February 10, 2025
Court: Appellate Court of Illinois, First District
Background
Petitioner Herman Roundtree initiated a parentage action for minor D.C. against deceased respondent Shoshanna Cooper. Following Cooper's death in December 2021, her mother, LaVerne Cooper, filed for grandparent visitation. The case was consolidated with Cooper's probate issue in August 2022. A guardian ad litem (GAL) was appointed to evaluate visitation claims.Legal Issues
Roundtree appealed the denial of his motion to disqualify the GAL, asserting the ruling was erroneous. However, the appellate court dismissed the appeal, citing lack of jurisdiction as the April 17, 2024 order was non-final.Key Developments
- September 2019: Roundtree filed a pro se petition for parentage.- December 2019: The court acknowledged Roundtree and Cooper as legal parents to D.C.
- April 2023: LaVerne petitioned for grandparent visitation after previous visitation rights were dismissed in January 2023.
- November 2023: The court appointed GAL Ashanti Madlock Henderson, who prepared a report despite Roundtree's opposition claiming bias.
- January 2024: A court order mandated Roundtree to make D.C. available to the GAL, and subsequent orders directed visitation arrangements.
Jurisdictional Review
The court determined jurisdiction must be assessed irrespective of the petitioner's submissions. The April 17, 2024 order did not meet the requirements of a final judgment under Rule 301 and was not appealable under Rule 304 due to unresolved claims.Conclusion
The appeal regarding the non-final order is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, underscoring the petitioner’s obligation to comply with Illinois Supreme Court rules as a pro se litigant. ```Ask AI About This Case
Have a specific question about In re Parentage of D.C.? Ask our AI assistant below.