Court Opinion

ID: 9819517
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 06:26:57.735766+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:38:31.007059
License: Public Domain

JUSTICE APPLETON, dissenting: I respectfully dissent from the majority’s decision in this case. I find no ambiguity in the language of section 2 — 21(2). 705 ILCS 405/ 2 — 21(2) (West 2002). Rather, the legislature could not have been more clear. “If*** the court determines and puts in writing the factual basis supporting the determination that the minor is *** neglected ***, the court shall then set a time[,] not later than 30 days after the entry of the finding[,] for a dispositional hearing.” (Emphases added.) 705 ILCS 405/2 — 21(2) (West 2002). We give the language of a statute its plain and ordinary meaning. Michigan Avenue National Bank, 191 Ill. 2d at 504, 732 N.E.2d at 535. Obviously, the legislature intended the entry of a written adjudicatory order to precede the scheduling of a dispositional hearing. Any other interpretation would distort the plain meaning of section 2 — 21(2). Not only does the State’s interpretation fail to agree with a natural reading of section 2 — 21(2), it does not withstand logical scrutiny. If timeliness were the legislature’s only concern in section 2 — 21(2), it is unclear why only a written adjudicatory order would begin the running of a 30-day clock. If, instead of entering a written adjudicatory order, the trial court merely announced its finding of neglect from the bench, would the court then have an indefinite period of time to schedule a dispositional hearing? It would seem so from the State’s interpretation. This anomaly vanishes if we understand section 2 — 21(2) to mean that the trial court has to express its finding of neglect, and the basis therefor, in a written order before setting the time for the dispositional hearing. Perhaps the legislature thought that before a court even scheduled a hearing on such weighty issues as whether children should be made wards of the court and be removed from their parents’ custody, the court should be clear and well-grounded in its finding that the children are indeed abused, neglected, or dependent. Expressing that finding, and the evidentiary bases for it, in a written order could encourage deliberation and clarity. Regardless of the legislature’s rationale, the statute says what it says, and our duty is to give effect to its plain language. [[Image here]] ADJUDICATORY ORDER [705 ILCS 405/2 — 21] THIS MATTER comes before the Court for hearing on the date noted above with the parties indicated being present. The parties have been advised of the nature of the proceedings as well as their rights and the dispositional alternatives available to the Court. The case is called for hearing on the Petition for Adjudication of Wardship. The Court makes the following FINDINGS: a. The Court has jurisdiction of the subject matter b. The Court has jurisdiction of the parties in that the Court file shows that: i. The minor has □ been served with summons □ not been served with summons but is present □ not been served with summons but has entered an appearance and is under the age of 8 years ii. The mother of the minor has □ been served with summons □ not been served with summons but is present □ been notified by publication □ not been served with summons but service is not required because: iii. The father of the minor has □ been served with summons □ not been served with summons but is present □ been notified by publication □ not been served with summons but service is not required because: iv. The responsible relative/guardian/custodian of the minor has □ been served with summons □ not been served with summons but is present □ been notified by publication □ not been served with summons but service is not required because: v. A diligent search has been conducted but_ cannot be found. c. Those respondents who have been served with summons or by publication and have not entered an appearance are in default. d. The guardian ad litem has had personal contact with the minor and with the foster parents or care caregivers of the minor or such contact has been excused [705 ILCS 405/2 — 17(8)]. e. □ The minor is not abused, neglected or dependent based on the following facts: f. □ Findings of abuse, neglect or dependency are reserved pursuant to 705 ILCS 405/2 — 20. g. □ The minor is abused or neglected as defined by 705 ILCS 405/ 2 — 3 in that the minor: □ suffers from a lack of support, education, remedial care as defined by 705 ILCS 405/2 — 3(l)(a) □ is in an environment that is injurious to the welfare of the minor as defined by 705 ILCS 405/2 — 3(l)(b) □ as a newborn was exposed to illicit drugs as defined by 705 ILCS 405/2 — 3(l)(c) □ is under 14 years of age and unsupervised for an unreasonable period of time as defined by 705 ILCS 405/2 — 3(l)(d) □ is physically abused as defined by 705 ILCS 405/2 — 3(2)(i) □ is in substantial risk of physically abuse as defined by 705 ILCS 405/2 — 3(2)(ii) □ is sexually abused as defined by 705 ILCS 405/2 — 3(2)(iii) □ has been tortured as defined by 705 ILCS 405/2 — 3(2)(iv) □ has been the subject of excessive corporal punishment as defined by 705 ILCS 405/2 — 3(2)(v) This finding is based on the following facts: _ h. The abuse or neglect □ was not inflicted by a parent, guardian or legal custodian □ was inflicted by: □ a parent or parents, specifically_ □ a guardian specifically_ □ a legal custodian specifically_ □ _who is _ i. □ The minor is dependent as defined by 705 ILCS 405/2 — 4 in that the minor: □ is without a parent, guardian or legal custodian as defined by 705 ILCS 405/2 — 4(l)(a) □ is without proper care because of the physical or mental disability of a parent, guardian or legal custodian as defined by 705 ILCS 405/2 — 4(l)(b) □ is without necessary and proper medical or remedial care through no fault, neglect or lack of concern of a parent, guardian or legal custodian as defined by 705 ILCS 405/2 — 4(l)(c) □ has a parent, guardian or legal custodian who with good cause wishes to be relieved of all residual parental rights and responsibilities as defined by 705 ILCS 405/2 — 4(l)(d) This finding is based on the following facts: _ j. If the minor remains placed outside the home, it is because it is contrary to the health, welfare and safety of the minor to remain in the home, and reasonable efforts have been offered or engaged in by the responsible agency. THEREFORE, it is the ORDER of this Court that: 1. The Petition is □ DISMISSED. 2. The allegations of the petition with respect to the minor have been proved by □ a preponderance of the evidence □ clear and convincing evidence 3. The dispositional hearing will be held: □ instanter □ on the_at__ _is to send notice. 4. The 30 day requirement of 705 ILCS 405/2 — 21(2) is waived by the parties and the waiver is consistent with the health, safety and best interests of the minor. 5. An investigation shall be made and a report prepared by □ the Illinois Department of Children and Family Services □ _ (other agency) detailing the physical and mental history of the minor, the family situation and such other relevant information deemed appropriate. 6. The parents and the minor are directed to immediately contact the office of the agency preparing the investigation to make an appointment concerning the report. They are to provide the information requested and execute releases allowing the agency to collect information for the report. 7. The report is to be submitted to the Court and the parties not less than seventy-two (72) hours prior to the dispositional hearing. 8. Terms and conditions concerning the temporary custody of the minor remain as previously set forth in the Temporary Custody Order. (If custody is removed at the adjudicatory hearing, a written temporary custody order must be used.) 9. The parents are admonished that they must cooperate with the Illinois Department of Children and Family Services. The parents must comply with the terms of the service plan and correct the conditions that require the minor to be in care or they risk termination of their parental rights. Dated_ Judge