Sutton v. Ekong, 994 N.E.2d 589

Plaintiff Sutton filed suit on December 19, 2008 against Ekong, Norris, and Major for a July 26, 2007 multi-vehicle collision in Chicago.
Efforts to serve Ekong at his residence on South Oglesby Avenue failed; multiple attempts were made with no contact.
Plaintiff sought and obtained leave to serve Ekong through the Secretary of State under 2-203.1 and 10-301 Vehicle Code due to evasion concerns.
Secretary of State accepted service on Ekong on June 8, 2009.
Default judgment was entered against Ekong on April 13, 2011 after he failed to appear or plead; damages were later awarded.
Ekong personally served with a citation to discover assets on August 10, 2011, followed by his appearance on September 13, 2011; he petitioned to vacate the judgment in late 2011 and 2012.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the default judgment is void for lack of personal jurisdiction	Ekong was properly served via the Secretary of State under 2-203.1	Service through the Secretary of State was improper because Ekong resided in Illinois and proper diligent inquiry was not conducted	Default judgment void for lack of personal jurisdiction; service improper.
Whether service complied with diligent inquiry requirements under 2-203.1	Plaintiff exercised diligence and discovered Ekong's business address only after leave to serve	Plaintiff did not perform a diligent inquiry before seeking special service	Service via Secretary of State improper due to insufficient diligent inquiry.

In re Dar. C., 2011 IL 111083 (2011) (strict diligent inquiry requirement for service)
Mugavero v. Kenzler, 317 Ill. App. 3d 162 (2000) (diligent inquiry standard for Section 2-203.1)
In re Marriage of Schmitt, 321 Ill. App. 3d 360 (2001) (mult ijurisdictional service diligence analysis; attempts at service)
Citimortgage, Inc. v. Cotton, 2012 IL App (1st) 102438 (2012) (lack of personal jurisdiction renders judgment void)