RETYPED FOR ELECTRONIC TRANSFER SPACE
STATE OF ILLINOIS
APPELLATE COURT
FOURTH DISTRICT
supreme court building, springfield IL
date 03/ 04/94
RE: Cole, Johanna S. V. Osterbur, Jim
gen # 4-93-0441
champaign 92s02991
order filed 09/ 02/93
NOTICE I have today issued the mandate of this court in the above entitled cause, pursuant to the provisions of supreme court rule 368
Darryl Pratscher, clerk Appellate court fourth district
to Osterbur, Jim
Johanna S. Cole
Linda S. Frank (with mandate) circuit clerk, champaign county
Harry E. Clem (with information copy of mandate)
champaign county courthouse
101 E. main st
Urbana, IL 61801-2737
retyped for electronic transfer space
STATE OF ILL
APPELLATE COURT
fourth district, supreme court building, springfield IL
dated June 1, 1993
JIM OSTERBUR
JOHANNA S. COLE
LINDA S FRANK, circuit clerk, champaign county
RE: Cole, Johanna S. V. Osterbur, Jim
gen no 4-93-0441 Champaign 92s2991
The docketing statement in the above entitled cause was received and filed. On the court's own motion the due dates for filing in this cause have been accelerated under the authority of supreme court rule 343. This acceleration is based on the nature of the case and the comparatively short trial involved.
We expect to set this case for oral argument (if requested) during the month of Nov 1993. You are advised that ANY motions for extension of time are not favored and will be allowed by the court only in the most extreme and compelling circumstances.
In connection with this appeal, you attention is directed to the possibility of using an agreed statement of facts if appropriate.
Darryl Pratscher
Clerk appellate court, fourth district.
retyped for electronic transfer space
STATE OF ILL
APPELLATE COURT, FOURTH DISTRICT,
SUPREME COURT BUILDING, SPRINGFIELD IL 62701-1792
clerk of the court 217 782 2586 Research director 217 782 3528
DATE 08/ 26/ 93
RE; Cole, Johanna S. V. Osterbur, Jim
gen 4-93-0441
county champaign
trial no. 92s2991
to counsel:
I have today entered the following order of the court in the above entitled case:
Appellant ruled to show cause on or before 09/02/93, why appeal should not be dismissed for failure to file brief as required by rules 342 and 343. Failure to comply with these rules will result in dismissal of appeal.
Darryl Pratscher
to Jim Osterbur
Johanna S. Cole
retyped for electronic transfer space
No 4-93-0441
In the APPELLATE COURT OF ILL, FOURTH DISTRICT
JOHANNA S. COLE
PLAINTIFF/ APPELLEE
V.
JIM OSTERBUR
DEFENDANT APPELLANT
Appeal from circuit court of champaign county no 92s2991 Harry E Clem judge presiding.
ORDER
In response to a rule entered against appellant to show cause why his appeal should not be dismissed for failure to file an appellate brief, appellant has provided the court with one copy of a document which purports to be his brief on appeal. The document does not comply with supreme court rules 341 through 344 concerning the form and content of briefs, the manner of filing, and the number of copies to be provided to the court and the parties to the appeal. Appellants "brief" also fails to provide any citations to any authority for the claims he raises or a coherent factual background by which these claims of error may reasonably be considered by the court. This too violates supreme court rule (e) (7). Arguments made without citation of supporting authority are deemed waived on appeal. Pauly v. Werries (1984), 122 ILL. app 3d 263, 461 NE 2d 54. Despite these failings, appellant complains that he is appearing pro se. Nevertheless the rule is clear that a litigant appearing pro se in the appellate court is obligated to follow the same rules as a litigant represented by counsel. Biggs v. Spader (1951) 411 ILL 42, 103 NE 2d 104; in re marriage of winters (1987), 160 ILL app 3d 277, 512 NE 2d 137.
In view of the substantial failure of appellant to comply with supreme court rules concerning the form and content of briefs, the court deems appellants response to the rule insufficient and orders the appeal DISMISSED for failure to comply with supreme court rules.
APPEAL DISMISSED ENTERED SEPT 2, 1993
ORDER OF THE COURT CONSISTING OF THE PANEL OF
Frederick S. Green/ Carl A. Lund/ Robert J. Steigmann