In re Haley D.
2011 IL 110886
| Ill. | 2011Background
- Haley D. was a neglected minor born to Ralph L. and Patricia D., exposed to cocaine in utero.
- The State filed a neglect petition in Du Page County, seeking Haley to be made a ward of the court.
- Patricia was served; Ralph was served by abode service on his mother; both complied with section 2-15.
- An adjudicatory hearing found Haley neglected; a dispositional hearing kept Haley as a ward with a goal of family reunification within 12 months.
- By late 2008 and 2009, reports and hearings showed Ralph’s progress but noted noncompliance with certain requirements; the permanency goal remained reunification.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the default on the termination petition should be set aside | Ralph’s default was proper; service by publication sufficed | Lack of service on Ralph violated due process and jurisdiction; default should be vacated | Default set aside; vacate termination order and remand |
| Whether 2-1301(e) vs 2-1401(a) governs Ralph’s relief from the default | Code sections were misapplied; relief under 2-1401(a) was used | 2-1301(e) governs before final judgment and should apply | 2-1301(e) applicable; relief should have been evaluated under it |
| Whether notice to Ralph complied with Rule 11 and 2-15(3) after appearance | Publication notice for Patricia implied notice to Ralph | No valid notice to Ralph; Rule 11 required | Notice requirements violated; due process concerns warranted setting aside |
| Whether the April 14, 2009 order was a final, appealable judgment | Order terminated Ralph’s rights via final judgment | It was a nonfinal default related step, not final termination | April 14 order not final; termination judgment remained subject to later proceedings |
| Whether the Court should remand or directly vacate to resolve termination | Remand to cure defects | Remand unnecessary if vacatur warranted | Vacate default; remand unnecessary |
Key Cases Cited
- In re E.B., 231 Ill. 2d 459 (2008) (highlights balancing child’s best interests with parental rights)
- In re Tolbert, 62 Ill. App. 3d 927 (1978) (grounds for termination under Adoption Act context)
- In re Adoption of D., 317 Ill. App. 3d 155 (2000) (interlocutory nature of termination orders in adoption context)
- People v. Vincent, 226 Ill. 2d 1 (2007) (burden for relief from final orders; due diligence standards)
- In re Marriage of Gutman, 232 Ill. 2d 145 (2008) (finality standards for judgments in dissolution/adoption contexts)
- Burton v. Autumn Grain Transport, Inc., 222 Ill. App. 3d 755 (1991) (interlocutory appealability under Rule 307 context)