Knox v. Taylor ( 2012 )

ILLINOIS OFFICIAL REPORTS
Appellate Court
Knox v. Taylor, 2012 IL App (2d) 110686
Appellate Court CHRISTOPHER KNOX, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. GLADYSE TAYLOR,
Caption Defendant-Appellee.
District & No. Second District
Docket No. 2-11-0686
Filed September 20, 2012
Held Plaintiff’s appeal was dismissed due to his failure to supply the appellate
(Note: This syllabus court with a certified record on appeal.
constitutes no part of
the opinion of the court
but has been prepared
by the Reporter of
Decisions for the
convenience of the
reader.)
Decision Under Appeal from the Circuit Court of Lee County, No. 09-MR-37; the Hon.
Review Daniel A. Fish, Judge, presiding.
Judgment Appeal dismissed.
Counsel on Christopher Knox, of Tamms, appellant pro se.
Appeal
Lisa Madigan, Attorney General, of Chicago (Michael A. Scodro,
Solicitor General, and Sharon A. Purcell, Assistant Attorney General, of
counsel), for appellee.
Panel PRESIDING JUSTICE JORGENSEN delivered the judgment of the
court, with opinion.
Justices Hutchinson and Schostok concurred in the judgment and opinion.
OPINION
¶1 On July 22, 2011, Christopher Knox filed a notice of appeal in Lee County case No. 09-
MR-37. He listed himself as the plaintiff and listed the Department of Corrections
(Department) and Gladyse Taylor, then acting director of the Department, as the defendants.
Knox never caused the clerk to file an appellate record, but instead has himself filed what
he represents to be copies of a selection of documents in the case. Because the absence of a
record prevents us from even deciding whether we have jurisdiction, we must dismiss the
appeal.
¶2 The absence of a certified record is fatal to this appeal. “An appellate court may not
consider documents that are not part of the certified record on appeal.” Kensington’s Wine
Auctioneers & Brokers, Inc. v. John Hart Fine Wine, Ltd., 392 Ill. App. 3d 1, 14 (2009); see
also Ill. S. Ct. R. 324 (eff. May 30, 2008) (concerning the clerk’s preparation and
certification of the record on appeal). This court thus does not have here any usable record
before it, only unofficial copies of the selected documents.
¶3 We cannot determine whether we have jurisdiction here. A reviewing court has a duty
to consider its own jurisdiction and dismiss the appeal if jurisdiction is absent. Lebron v.
Gottlieb Memorial Hospital, 237 Ill. 2d 217, 251-52 (2010). By failing to supply a record,
Knox has prevented us from fulfilling that duty. Moreover, on the merits, we lack the
information needed even to speculate concerning what errors might or might not have
occurred.
¶4 For the reasons stated, we dismiss the appeal.
¶5 Appeal dismissed.
-2-