2021 IL App (2d) 200232
Ill. App. Ct.2021Background
- The Village of Bloomingdale filed a condemnation action; on May 7, 2019 the trial court granted Lake/Ridge’s traverse and dismissed the action.
- Lake/Ridge filed a petition for attorney fees under 735 ILCS 30/10-5-70(a) on July 29, 2019 (more than 30 days after the dismissal).
- Bloomingdale moved to strike the fee petition as untimely; the trial court struck it on October 16, 2019, reasoning fee requests must be filed within the 30-day period while the trial court retains jurisdiction.
- Lake/Ridge sought reconsideration and relief from judgment (omnibus motion including a 2-1401 component); relief was denied on February 25, 2020, and Lake/Ridge appealed the October 16 order.
- Central legal question: whether a section 10-5-70(a) fee application is a collateral matter that the trial court may hear after its general jurisdiction lapses (relying on Bank of Waukegan), or whether the statute requires the fee request to be made "in the action" while the trial court retains jurisdiction (as argued by Bloomingdale and supported by Rodriquez).
- The appellate court affirmed: fee petitions under section 10-5-70(a) must be brought in the underlying condemnation action while the trial court retains jurisdiction; Bank of Waukegan is treated as obsolete.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a §10-5-70(a) fee application may be filed after the trial court’s general jurisdiction lapses (i.e., is it a collateral matter permitting later filing) | Fee awards must be made "in the action;" the trial court lost jurisdiction 30 days after final judgment so the late petition is untimely | The fee petition is a collateral matter; trial courts retain jurisdiction to decide collateral matters at any time (relying on Bank of Waukegan) | Petition must be filed "in the action" while the trial court retains jurisdiction (generally within 30 days); Bank of Waukegan is obsolete and does not permit indefinite post-judgment filing |
Key Cases Cited
- Town of Libertyville v. Bank of Waukegan, 152 Ill. App. 3d 1066 (1987) (held fee petition was collateral and trial court could decide it despite notice of appeal; appellate court here deems that reasoning obsolete)
- Illinois Dept. of Financial & Professional Regulation v. Rodriquez, 2012 IL 113706 (supreme court construed a statutory fee provision to require the fee request be made to the court that granted relief, and thus while that court retains jurisdiction)
- John G. Phillips & Associates v. Brown, 197 Ill. 2d 337 (2001) (timely filing of a new claim or postjudgment motion can render a previously filed notice of appeal ineffective; explains interplay of 30-day timing)
- Belleville Toyota, Inc. v. Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc., 199 Ill. 2d 325 (2002) (explains that the legislature can create justiciable matters but cannot impose unwaivable jurisdictional conditions)
- General Motors Corp. v. Pappas, 242 Ill. 2d 163 (2011) (trial court retains jurisdiction after notice of appeal to determine matters collateral or incidental to the judgment)