County of Du Page v. Arjmand

Summary

The Illinois Appellate Court, Third District, reviews a dispute concerning an unfinished and unsafe residence owned by the Masud Arjmand Trust. Du Page County sought enforcement of county and property-maintenance-code violations, demolition or repair, fines, and related relief. The court affirmed in part and reversed and remanded in part the circuit court's rulings, including summary judgment, a demolition order, fines, and denial of a recusal motion.

Holdings

1. The demolition order was proper because the record established that the residence was dangerous and unsafe and that Arjmand had been given more than a reasonable opportunity to repair it, even though the circuit court did not make the specific findings contemplated by Meyer.
2. The circuit court had jurisdiction to order demolition because the postdissolution proceedings and the County's code-enforcement and demolition action did not involve the same parties asserting the same rights.
3. Summary judgment establishing liability on all counts was proper because Arjmand's remedial work did not create a genuine issue of material fact concerning the existence of the alleged violations.
4. The circuit court lacked authority to impose fines for ordinance violations alleged to have occurred after the August 4, 2021, summary judgment because those later violations had not been pleaded and proven before judgment.
5. The fines for counts I, VIII, X, and XI were improperly calculated and had to be reversed and remanded for recalculation based on the pleaded periods and evidence; the fines for count VII were affirmed.
6. The denial of Arjmand's recusal motion was affirmed because a party cannot compel a judge's removal through an informal recusal motion based solely on an appearance of impropriety; the proper procedure is a motion for substitution under section 2-1001, and the challenged comment did not demonstrate bias.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the circuit court properly ordered demolition without expressly making the findings that the residence was dangerous and unsafe and beyond reasonable repair.
2. Whether the circuit court had jurisdiction to order demolition despite Arjmand's ongoing postdissolution proceedings and Rahman's potential interest in the property.
3. Whether summary judgment was proper on the alleged County Code and International Property Maintenance Code violations despite Arjmand's evidence of remedial work.
4. Whether fines could be imposed for violations occurring after entry of summary judgment.
5. Whether the fines for counts I, VII, VIII, X, and XI were supported by the pleadings and evidence and properly calculated.
6. Whether the trial judge was required to recuse himself based on a comment concerning Arjmand's credibility.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded