Waukegan Hospitality Group, LLC v. Stretch's Sports Bar & Grill Corp., 2024 IL 129277

Waukegan Hospitality Group, LLC filed an eviction and money judgment action against Stretch’s Sports Bar & Grill Corp. in Lake County, Illinois.
After losing at trial, Waukegan’s notice of appeal was due April 1, 2021, but was not file-stamped until April 6, 2021.
Plaintiff claimed it had timely submitted the notice electronically on April 1, but the clerk rejected it and required resubmission.
The appellate court reviewed its own jurisdiction, held that the notice of appeal was untimely, and dismissed for lack of jurisdiction because plaintiff did not properly seek relief for the late filing.
Plaintiff neither sought relief for the untimely filing in circuit court under Rule 9(d)(2) nor in the appellate court under Rule 303(d).
The Illinois Supreme Court granted leave to appeal to consider whether the appellate court had jurisdiction in these circumstances.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Was the notice of appeal timely?	Plaintiff argued it submitted the notice before midnight on the due date and should not be penalized for clerk’s rejection.	Not briefed in Supreme Court (defendant did not file a brief); appellate argument accepted untimeliness.	Notice was untimely; record did not support plaintiff’s claim of timely submission; compliance with rules required.
Must a litigant seek relief for a rejected/untimely filing to preserve appellate rights?	Plaintiff asserted strict rule application violates due process; clerk’s rejection was erroneous.	Not briefed in Supreme Court.	Litigant must seek recourse under relevant Supreme Court rules; failure is fatal to jurisdiction.
Is the appellate court deprived of jurisdiction by an untimely notice of appeal?	Plaintiff argued the appellate court should retain jurisdiction due to the clerk’s error.	Not briefed in Supreme Court.	Appellate court lacked jurisdiction to hear the appeal given untimely notice and no relief sought.
Should the court prohibit clerks from rejecting filings for non-material defects?	Plaintiff recommended statewide change to e-filing practices.	Not briefed in Supreme Court.	No such directive issued; court rejected request.

First Capitol Mortgage Corp. v. Talandis Construction Corp., 63 Ill. 2d 128 (court may decide on appellant’s brief alone if record is simple and issues clear)
Foutch v. O’Bryant, 99 Ill. 2d 389 (appellant bears burden to provide complete record to support claim of error)
Midstate Siding & Window Co. v. Rogers, 204 Ill. 2d 314 (same principle regarding appellant record on appeal)
Vision Point of Sale, Inc. v. Haas, 226 Ill. 2d 334 (circuit court has discretion to decide what constitutes good cause for late filing)
Bank of Herrin v. Peoples Bank of Marion, 105 Ill. 2d 305 (reasonable excuse for late filing exists with honest mistake promptly rectified)
Keener v. City of Herrin, 235 Ill. 2d 338 (parties may not rely on matters outside record)