{
  "id": 2605689,
  "name": "In re MARRIAGE OF HARRIET E. THOMAS, Petitioner-Appellee, and MICHAEL THOMAS, Respondent-Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "In re Marriage of Thomas",
  "decision_date": "1991-05-22",
  "docket_number": "No. 3\u201490\u20140671",
  "first_page": "1073",
  "last_page": "1075",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "213 Ill. App. 3d 1073"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "474 N.E.2d 834",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "130 Ill. App. 3d 642",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App. 3d",
      "case_ids": [
        3492761
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app-3d/130/0642-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "449 N.E.2d 137",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "96 Ill. 2d 114",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. 2d",
      "case_ids": [
        3113757
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-2d/96/0114-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "307 N.E.2d 673",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "17 Ill. App. 3d 182",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App. 3d",
      "case_ids": [
        2514459
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app-3d/17/0182-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "550 N.E.2d 1069",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "194 Ill. App. 3d 46",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App. 3d",
      "case_ids": [
        8498015
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app-3d/194/0046-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 241,
    "char_count": 2927,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.778,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.08265578417892318
    },
    "sha256": "0ebf93e258188423efb6a9192c28a5cb8242031be5805e65506f7bd302f1c286",
    "simhash": "1:2fa7706e9f46bfc8",
    "word_count": 489
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T21:36:27.836966+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "In re MARRIAGE OF HARRIET E. THOMAS, Petitioner-Appellee, and MICHAEL THOMAS, Respondent-Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "JUSTICE McCUSKEY\ndelivered the opinion of the court:\nThe trial court entered a judgment dissolving the marriage of the petitioner, Harriet E. Thomas, and the respondent, Michael Thomas. The court also entered an order dividing the parties\u2019 property between them. Michael appeals the court\u2019s division of the property. We find that we do not have jurisdiction to consider this appeal and therefore dismiss it.\nThe only facts necessary for our determination are these: the trial court failed to dispose of two pieces of property, a building located at 513 East Dover Court, Davenport, Iowa, and a residential duplex located in Galesburg, Illinois.\nInitially, we note that neither of the parties has raised the issue of jurisdiction in this appeal. However, an appellate court has a duty to consider its own jurisdiction whether or not the issue was raised by the parties. In re Estate of Chlebos (1990), 194 Ill. App. 3d 46, 550 N.E.2d 1069.\nSupreme Court Rule 301 (134 Ill. 2d R. 301) generally provides that this court has jurisdiction over a timely appeal from a final judgment. An order will be classified as final when it terminates the litigation on the merits of the case so that, if affirmed, the trial court has only to proceed with execution of the judgment (Schwind v. Mattson (1974), 17 Ill. App. 3d 182, 307 N.E.2d 673).\nIn general, a petition for dissolution is not fully adjudicated until.all of the issues, i.e., grounds, child custody, child support, maintenance, and property distribution, are resolved. In re Marriage of Leopando (1983), 96 Ill. 2d 114, 449 N.E.2d 137.\nIn the instant case there has never been a final judgment to support an appeal. The trial court simply failed to dispose of all the property in its order. As such, the court\u2019s order was not final and appealable. (See King v. King (1985), 130 Ill. App. 3d 642, 474 N.E.2d 834.) We note in so finding that none of the supreme court rules providing for interlocutory appeals is applicable here.\nFinally, we note the parties acknowledge in their briefs the trial court failed to dispose of two pieces of property. No doubt each of them became aware of this circumstance following receipt of the trial court\u2019s order. The proper procedure at that point would have been to bring this to the trial court\u2019s attention in a motion to reconsider. This would have provided the trial court the opportunity to correct the matter and saved both this court and the parties valuable time.\nBased on the foregoing, we find no appealable order and dismiss the appeal.\nAppeal dismissed.\nHAASE and GORMAN, JJ., concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "JUSTICE McCUSKEY"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Walter D. Braud and Duane Thompson, both of Braud/Warner, Ltd., of Rock Island, for appellant.",
      "H. Reed Doughty, of Nagle, Harris, Cook, Payson & Doughty, of Davenport, Iowa, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "In re MARRIAGE OF HARRIET E. THOMAS, Petitioner-Appellee, and MICHAEL THOMAS, Respondent-Appellant.\nThird District\nNo. 3\u201490\u20140671\nOpinion filed May 22, 1991.\nWalter D. Braud and Duane Thompson, both of Braud/Warner, Ltd., of Rock Island, for appellant.\nH. Reed Doughty, of Nagle, Harris, Cook, Payson & Doughty, of Davenport, Iowa, for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "1073-01",
  "first_page_order": 1095,
  "last_page_order": 1097
}