1 

2022 IL App (5th) 200393-U 

NO. 5-20-0393 

IN THE

APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS

FIFTH DISTRICT

______________________________________________________________________________ 

THERESA M. JOHNSON, ) Appeal from the

 ) Circuit Court of

Plaintiff-Appellant, ) St. Clair County. 

 ) 

v. ) No. 20-SC-766 

 ) 

RONALD L. ELLEDGE JR., ) Honorable 

 ) Jeffrey K. Watson,

Defendant-Appellee. ) Judge, presiding.

______________________________________________________________________________ 

JUSTICE BARBERIS delivered the judgment of the court.

 Presiding Justice Boie and Justice Moore concurred in the judgment.

 

 ORDER

¶ 1 Held: We affirm the circuit court’s judgment in favor of defendant where plaintiff 

failed to provide a sufficient record to review plaintiff’s claim of error.

¶ 2 Plaintiff, Theresa M. Johnson, appeals the October 28, 2020, judgment entered by the St. 

Clair County circuit court in favor of defendant, Ronald L. Elledge Jr., following a bench trial on 

plaintiff’s small claims complaint. For the following reasons, we affirm.

¶ 3 I. Background 

¶ 4 On March 20, 2020, plaintiff filed, pro se, a small claims complaint against defendant in 

the circuit court of St. Clair County, alleging that defendant owed her $4081.71 plus interest for 

money he borrowed but never repaid. On August 11, 2020, defendant filed, pro se, an answer, 

NOTICE

Decision filed 01/12/22. The 

text of this decision may be 

changed or corrected prior to 

the filing of a Petition for 

Rehearing or the disposition of 

the same.

NOTICE

This order was filed under 

Supreme Court Rule 23 and is 

not precedent except in the 

limited circumstances allowed 

under Rule 23(e)(1).
2 

denying plaintiff’s allegations and requesting a trial. The matter was set for trial on October 27, 

2020. 

¶ 5 On October 28, 2020, the circuit court entered a written order granting judgment in favor 

of defendant and against plaintiff. The court’s written order indicates that both parties appeared, 

pro se, for trial on October 27, 2020, and that “[a]fter testimony, evidence and review of all 

exhibits,” the court found in favor of defendant. The record on appeal contains the trial exhibits, 

including 15 plaintiff’s exhibits and 2 defendant exhibits, but does not contain a transcript or 

bystander’s report of the trial proceedings held on October 27, 2020.

¶ 6 On December 2, 2020, plaintiff filed a notice of appeal from the circuit court’s October 

28, 2020, judgment.1 On January 22, 2021, the record on appeal, consisting of one volume of 

common law record (28 pages) and one volume of trial exhibits (75 pages), was filed and this 

court set a briefing schedule. Plaintiff filed an appellant’s brief, but no appellee’s brief was filed 

and, thus, the appeal was submitted to this court for decision on the appellant’s brief only. 

¶ 7 II. Analysis 

¶ 8 On appeal, plaintiff argues that “[t]he facts of the case and the evidence introduced in the 

trial court do not support a sound and substantial basis for the judge’s decision.” As noted, 

defendant has not filed a responsive appellee’s brief. We nevertheless may address the merits of 

this appeal if we determine that plaintiff’s claims of error may be easily decided without the 

benefit of an opposing brief. See First Capitol Mortgage Corp. v. Talandis Construction Corp., 

63 Ill. 2d 128, 133 (1976) (“if the record is simple and the claimed errors are such that the court 

1

On December 4, 2020, this court entered an order granting plaintiff 14 days to show cause why 

the notice of appeal should not be stricken as untimely, and the appeal dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. 

On December 7, 2020, plaintiff filed a response to this court’s show cause order. This court construed 

plaintiff’s response as a motion for leave to file a late notice of appeal and granted the motion on 

December 10, 2020. 
3 

can easily decide them without the aid of an appellee’s brief, the court of review should decide 

the merits of the appeal”).

¶ 9 “Generally speaking, the standard of review we apply when a party challenges a trial 

court’s bench-trial ruling is whether the trial court’s judgment is contrary to the manifest weight 

of the evidence.” Jackson v. Bowers, 314 Ill. App. 3d 813, 818 (2000). “A judgment is against 

the manifest weight of the evidence where the opposite conclusion is clearly evident or where the 

finding is unreasonable, arbitrary, or not based on the evidence presented.” (Internal quotation 

marks omitted.) Bangaly v. Baggiani, 2014 IL App (1st) 123760, ¶ 142. 

¶ 10 An appellant has the burden of presenting a sufficiently complete record of the trial court 

proceedings to support claims of error and, in the absence of such a record, this court will 

presume that the trial court’s order conformed with the law and had a sufficient factual basis. 

Foutch v. O’Bryant, 99 Ill. 2d 389, 391-92 (1984). Any doubts arising from an incomplete record 

will be resolved against the appellant. Foutch, 99 Ill. 2d at 392.

¶ 11 In the present case, our review of the circuit court’s October 28, 2020, judgment is 

hindered by an insufficient record. The court’s written order indicates that the court found in 

favor of defendant after considering the testimony, evidence, and exhibits presented at the 

October 27, 2020, trial. While the trial exhibits have been included in the record on appeal, the 

record does not contain a transcript of the October 27, 2020, trial proceedings and plaintiff did 

not file a bystander’s report or an agreed statement of facts as permitted by Illinois Supreme 

Court Rule 323 (eff. July 1, 2017). See Ill. S. Ct. R. 323 (in lieu of a trial court transcript, an 

appellant may file a bystander’s report (Rule 323(c)) or an agreed statement of facts (Rule 

323(d)). Consequently, this court cannot ascertain the substance of the witnesses’ trial testimony, 
4 

the parties’ respective arguments at trial, the weight afforded to the evidence and exhibits at trial, 

or the rationale that provided the basis for the court’s judgment in favor of defendant. 

¶ 12 Therefore, after examining the record, this court cannot discern where the manifest 

weight of the evidence lies. We also find it noteworthy that, due to the insufficient record, the 

factual statement submitted by plaintiff cannot conform to the requirement of Illinois Supreme 

Court Rule 341(h)(6) (eff. Oct. 1, 2020), which requires appropriate reference to the pages of the 

record. Under these circumstances, this court must presume that the trial court acted in 

conformity with the law and ruled properly after considering the evidence before it. Corral v. 

Mervis Industries, Inc., 217 Ill. 2d 144, 156-57 (2005); Foutch, 99 Ill. 2d at 391-92. 

¶ 13 III. Conclusion

¶ 14 For these reasons, we affirm the judgment of the circuit court of St. Clair County. 

¶ 15 Affirmed.