Background
In a dissolution-of-marriage case, Patricia McBean filed a supplemental petition three days before the scheduled nonjury trial seeking partition by sale of marital property and an injunction for protection against stalking against Alfred J. McBean. Alfred did not attend the trial.
The final judgment of dissolution granted, among other relief, the stalking injunction and relief concerning the property. Alfred appealed both the injunction and the non-injunctive provisions of the judgment.
The Court’s Holding
The Fifth District reversed the portion of the final judgment granting the stalking injunction. The court held that Patricia’s petition was legally insufficient on its face to support an injunction for protection against stalking, and remanded with instructions to vacate the injunction.
The court dismissed Alfred’s challenges to the non-injunctive portions of the order because they were nonfinal and nonappealable. That dismissal was without prejudice to his ability to challenge future appealable orders in the case.
Key Takeaways
- A stalking injunction cannot stand on a petition that is legally insufficient on its face.
- Review of a nonfinal injunction order does not extend to unrelated non-injunctive, nonfinal rulings.
- The dismissal of the property-related appeal does not bar a later appeal from an appealable order.
Why It Matters
The decision reinforces that injunctions for protection against stalking require a legally sufficient petition, even when sought within ongoing family-law litigation.
It also limits interlocutory appellate review: an appeal from injunctive relief does not open the door to review of other unresolved aspects of a dissolution judgment.