A plaintiff’s quest for justice was halted as the Illinois Appellate Court dismissed his appeal, citing a lack of jurisdiction. On September 5, 2024, Stephen Durr filed a complaint in the Circuit Court of Cook County against the County of Cook and Corporation Counsel, later identified as the City of Chicago.
Stephen Durr's legal battle began on June 21, 2022, when he filed a pro se complaint alleging that an error on his mittimus led to him being held in prison beyond his sentence. Durr had entered a guilty plea to public indecency on January 11, 2022, and was sentenced to one year of imprisonment with credit for time served. However, due to a blank space for mandatory supervised release (MSR) on his mittimus, prison officials presumed he had an additional one-year MSR term. This assumption led to his continued detention until April 29, 2022.
Durr argued that if not for the sentencing judge’s omission, he would have been released earlier. He accused the judge of willfully breaching ministerial duties and sought compensatory damages and an apology letter from the defendants under the Local Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act. The County moved to dismiss the complaint on August 12, 2022, arguing no liability over judges who are immune from suit. The court granted this motion on August 17, dismissing the County with prejudice but leaving "Corporation Counsel" pending.
The City of Chicago also moved to dismiss on September 30, 2022, contending it was not properly identified as a defendant and that its Department of Law was not suable. The court agreed and dismissed Durr’s complaint without prejudice on April 5, 2023. Following multiple motions and amended complaints by Durr—who missed crucial hearings—the case saw several dismissals and reinstatements until it was finally dismissed with prejudice on December 22, 2023.
Durr appealed this decision but faced another setback when the appellate court ruled it lacked jurisdiction since the December order was amended to be without prejudice before his appeal notice was filed. Thus, no final judgment existed for appellate review.
Representing himself throughout these proceedings has undoubtedly added complexity to Durr's pursuit of justice. The case highlights procedural intricacies that can significantly impact litigants' outcomes.
The attorneys involved were not explicitly named in this document. The presiding judge in the circuit court was Honorable Scott D. McKenna while Justices Hoffman, Martin, and Ocasio handled the appellate decision under Case ID No.1-24-0155.