28 / 56
to impose a judgment on any party over
whom it lacks that personal jurisdiction.
In
re M.W.
, 232 Ill.2d 408, 426-27 (2009).
A judgment that is void for lack of
in
personam
jurisdiction may be attacked at
any time and place, in any court, directly
or collaterally, even for the first time on
appeal.
Marriage of Verdung
, 126 Ill.2d
at 547;
Sarkissian
, 201 Ill.2d at 103;
City
of Chicago v. Fair Employment Practices
Com’n.
, 65 Ill.2d 108, 112 (1976);
People
v. Thompson
, 209 Ill.2d 19, 25 (2004);
BAC
Home Loans Servicing, LP v. Mitchell
, 2014
IL 116311, ¶ 45;
Mugavero
, 317 Ill.App.3d
at 166;
Lewis v. West Side Trust & Savings
Bank
, 377 Ill. 384, 385 (1941);
J.C. Penny
,
114 Ill.App.3d at 646. The void-for-lack-
of-jurisdiction argument is so important
and so crucial that the waiver rule does not
apply.
Mugavero
, 317 Ill.App.3d at 166.
If the purported service upon the
defendant was by a private person and
not by the local sheriff, the common law
presumption of validity which attaches
to personal service by the sheriff does not
apply.
Mitchell v. Tatum
, 104 Ill.App.3d
986, 989 (1st Dist. 1982). Even in the
case of service by the sheriff, if the service
is substituted service on a member of the
household pursuant to 735 ILCS 5/2-
203(a), the presumption of validity of the
service does not apply.
Prudential Property
or of a partnership is a mere nullity…
and the whole action fails.”
Alton Evening
Telegraph v Doak,
11 Ill.App.3d 381 (5th
Dist. 1973).
Another possibility is that if the named
plaintiff or defendant is a purported cor-
poration or limited liability company, it
might actually be merely an assumed name
for the corporation or LLC, and not itself a
corporation or a limited liability company.
Arguably, a corporate assumed name is
not
a legal entity. Although a corporation
may adopt an assumed name [805 ILCS
5/4.15(a)], the corporation must sue in its
own corporate name and may not sue in its
assumed name. By statute, a corporation is
authorized “to sue and be sued, complain
and defend, in its corporate name.” 805
ILCS 5/3.10(b);
Roe v. Catholic Charities
of the Diocese of Springfield, Illinois
, 225 Ill.
App.3d 519, 528 (5th Dist. 1992). There
is no statutory or common law authority
for a corporation to sue or be sued, or to
complain or defend, in an assumed name
or any name other than its full, proper
corporate name. 805 ILCS 5/3.10(b).
The 304(a) Solution
Supreme Court Rule 304(a) explicitly
states that if a lawsuit involves multiple
parties or multiple claims for relief, a
judgment which disposes of anything less
than all of the parties and all of the claims,
rights and liabilities is not enforceable or
appealable and is “subject to revision at
any time”–unless and until the court either
finds that there is no just reason for delay-
ing enforcement or appeal of the order or
enters an order which disposes of all parties
and all claims, rights and liabilities.
This means that without a so-called
304(a) finding, if a judgment is entered
which is valid on its face, and for which the
Circuit Court had jurisdiction, but there
remains a lingering undisposed party or
claim, the judgment cannot be enforced,
cannot be appealed, and is subject to revi-
sion at any time. Crucially, because the
judgment is subject to revision at any time,
the 30 days to attack the judgment under
735 ILCS 5/2-1301(e) and the two years
to attack the judgment under 735 ILCS
5/2-1401 do not begin to run until either
the court finds that there is no just reason
& Casualty Insurance Co. v. Dickerson
, 202
Ill.App.3d 180, 184 (1st Dist. 1990).
Sometimes it is possible to establish that
the judgment creditor or the judgment
debtor is not a recognized legal entity,
which also renders the judgment void. All
parties to a lawsuit must be either natural
or artificial persons.
Bavel v. Cavaness
, 12
Ill.App.3d 633, 637 (5th Dist. 1973).
There must be a plaintiff and a defendant,
and each must be either a natural or artifi-
cial person in being.
Knowles v. Mid-West
Automation Systems, Inc.
, 211 Ill.App.3d
682, 688 (1st Dist. 1991). Where this
rule is violated, and a judgment is entered
involving an entity that is not recognized
as a legal entity, the judgment is void
ab
initio
.
Relf v. Shatayeva
, 2013 IL 114925,
¶ 22 (dead person);
Capital One Bank,
N.A. v. Czekala
, 379 Ill.App.3d 737, 743
(3d Dist. 2008) (non-existent business);
Reed v. Long
, 122 Ill.App.2d 295, 297 (4th
Dist. 1970) (dead person);
Tyler v. J.C.
Penny Co., Inc.
, 145 Ill.App.3d 967, 972
(4th Dist. 1986) (common description of
a group of stores);
Lewis v. West Side Trust
& Savings Bank,
377 Ill. 384, 385 (1941)
(partnership, under then-existing law,
changed by 735 ILCS 5/2-411). “A lawyer
should know his client when he files his
suit…. A suit brought in a name which is
not that of a natural person, a corporation
28
SEPTEMBER 2017