Meade appealed the court's decision, and the Kellers cross-appealed requesting attorney fees and costs. The first issue we address on appeal is whether the trial court properly determined that it had subject matter jurisdiction to adjudicate the Kellers' complaint. Meade argues that because Walker was deceased prior to the filing of the Kellers' complaint, the original complaint filed one year after Walker's death was null, void ab initio , and did not invoke the jurisdiction of the trial court. In addition, subject matter jurisdiction was not conferred on the court when Meade appeared on behalf of Walker's insurance company because subject matter jurisdiction cannot be waived or consented to by the parties. We review a trial court's decision that it has subject matter jurisdiction de novo .
Jurisdiction is of two types, subject matter jurisdiction and personal jurisdiction.
104 Ill. App. Personal jurisdiction may be waived. However, subject matter jurisdiction cannot be waived, conferred by stipulation, or consented to by the parties. Lack of subject matter jurisdiction can be raised at any time, even on appeal. While at first blush one might classify this sequence of events as one involving personal jurisdiction, a review of the cases dealing with this subject reveals that the law is well settled that the court lacks subject matter jurisdiction where a party files a suit against a deceased person.