Court Opinion

ID: 9727975
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 13:54:11.757702+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:25:44.755681
License: Public Domain

Mr. PRESIDING JUSTICE GEORGE J. MORAN, concurring in part and dissenting in part: The trial court had jurisdiction over all the necessary parties to this case. Therefore the decree in this case cannot be null and void for lack of jurisdiction over a necessary party. The Neuners filed a motion to dismiss in the following language: “Move this court to dismiss them as parties in the above entitled action or in the alternative for this court to enter an order confirming that the temporary injunction is dissolved.” This verifies that in addition to being served with process, the Neuners attempted to exercise some control over their rights in this litigation. Instead of having a situation where there is a failure of essential parties, we have the lack of a final appealable order. An order was entered concerning the Rollbergs’ rights, but there was never any final resolution of the Neuners’ rights. For this reason this is not a final judgment and this case should be remanded to the trial court to dispose of all the issues. I concur with the decision to remand this case for further proceedings, but for reasons other than those stated in the majority opinion.