By
Joanne R. Driscoll
Forde Law Offices LLP
While
the advent of electronic filing has extended the time deadline within which
jurisdictional filings can be made – from the end of business until 11:59 p.m.
– counsel’s failure to allow enough time for uploading the filing before
midnight can result in disastrous consequences.
In
Peraino v. County of Winnebago, 2018
IL App (2d) 170368, decided on March 30, 2018, the
Illinois Appellate Court, Second District, dismissed an appeal for lack of
jurisdiction because a post-trial motion to reconsider the granting of a
summary judgment motion was stamp-filed 12:03 a.m. on January 4, 2017. The motion for reconsideration was due on January
3, 2017.
On
January 5, 2017, the plaintiff moved in the circuit court for leave to file his
motion to reconsider nun pro tunc to
January 3, 2017, contending that the I2File website would not upload his
post-trial motion at 11:58 p.m. on January 3, 2017. The circuit court denied the motion, citing
to local rule 22.01(N) (17th Judicial Cir. Ct. R. 22.01(N) (July 25, 2016)) and
to provisions in the Illinois Supreme Court’s Illinois Electronic Filing User
Manual (Ill. S. Ct., M.R. 18367 (eff. Feb. 3, 2014)) directed at technical
failures experienced during electronic filing. The circuit court found neither rule applied because there were no
technical defects in the software or electronic filing system, only user
problems. The plaintiff appealed.
The
appellate court dismissed the appeal, sua
sponte, for lack of jurisdiction
because the plaintiff’s failure to file a timely post-trial motion meant that
his notice of appeal was due within 30 days of the summary judgment order (January
3, 2017), and the plaintiff did not move the appellate court for leave to file
a late notice of appeal under Illinois Supreme Court Rule 303(d) (eff. Jan. 1,
2015). The appellate court also vacated
the circuit court’s order, holding that the circuit court lost jurisdiction to
consider the plaintiff’s request to backdate his motion to reconsider. Although not pivotal to its decision, the appellate
court agreed that “technical failures” referenced in electronic filing rules
pertain to the malfunction of the court’s hardware, software or
telecommunications facility; it does not include the failure of the user’s
equipment.
All
may not be lost to the plaintiff, however, as the appellate court suggested one
alternative still available – to request supervisory or other relief from the Illinois
Supreme Court.
DISCLAIMER: The Appellate Lawyers Association does not provide legal services or legal advice. Discussions of legal principles and authority, including, but not limited to, constitutional provisions, statutes, legislative enactments, court rules, case law, and common-law doctrines are for informational purposes only and do not constitute legal advice.
