Moore v. Moore — appeal dismissed because contempt order was not final

Case
Ashley Moore v. Brandon Moore
Court
Appellate Court of Illinois, First District, Fifth Division
Judge
Presiding Justice Oden Johnson; Justice C.A. Walker; Justice Wilson
Date Decided
October 16, 2026
Docket No.
1-25-1481
Topics
civil contempt; appellate jurisdiction; child support; family law
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

Ashley Moore and Brandon Moore divorced in 2023 and entered orders governing child support and their shares of the children’s medical, educational, childcare, and extracurricular expenses. After Brandon Moore became unemployed, the circuit court modified his support obligation in October 2024.

Ashley later sought contempt relief, alleging that Brandon had not paid child support or his shares of other child-related expenses. In July 2025, the circuit court found him in civil contempt, stated that he had accrued $15,253.95 in arrearages, stayed commitment until August 15, and allowed him to purge by paying Ashley $1,000. The court set a later status hearing on the purge. Brandon appealed before that status proceeding.

The Court’s Holding

The Illinois Appellate Court dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. A contempt finding is appealable only when it imposes a sanction, such as a fine or imprisonment. The July 2025 order did not impose a final sanction: it provided a purge opportunity and continued the matter for a later status hearing.

The $1,000 purge payment did not itself make the order final. It concerned child-support-related money Brandon already owed and therefore was not a new penalty under Illinois Supreme Court Rule 304(b)(5). Because the contempt order was nonfinal, the appeal was premature.

Key Takeaways

  • A contempt finding alone is not immediately appealable in Illinois.
  • A purge payment for an existing child-support obligation is not necessarily an appealable contempt penalty.
  • An appeal filed before a final contempt sanction is imposed must be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

Why It Matters

The decision underscores the distinction between a contempt finding with a future purge proceeding and a final contempt judgment imposing an actual fine or imprisonment. Family-law litigants challenging contempt orders must determine whether the order is final before appealing.

The court also noted that Brandon’s later section 2-1401 petition could not proceed because that statute provides relief only from final orders and judgments.

✉️ Get tomorrow’s cases before your first coffee
Daily Case Law is our free morning digest — the most substantive new decisions, filtered to your jurisdictions and topics, each linking back here for the full analysis.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top