LAURA A. BRZOWSKI, n/k/a Laura A. Zasadny, Petitioner-Appellee,
WALTER J. BRZOWSKI, Respondent-Appellant
Appeal from the Circuit Court of the 12th Judicial Circuit, Will County, Illinois, Circuit No. 07-OP-595. The Honorable Victoria M. Kennison, Judge, Presiding.
Affirmed in part and vacated in part; cause remanded with directions.
In proceedings arising from an order of protection entered for petitioner that was extended several times and was subjected to numerous pro se appeals by respondent raising the same frivolous and previously decided issues, the appellate court, in the instant appeal from the extension of the order of protection by a trial judge who had recused herself but then heard evidence and entered the extension order without a remittal, vacated that judge's orders and then, in the interest of preserving the status quo until petitioner's emergency motion to extend the order could be heard before a different judge, ordered that the order of protection remain in effect, on a temporary basis, and directed the trial court to hold such a hearing within 21 days.
Walter J. Brzowski, of Pinckneyville, appellant pro se.
No brief filed for appellee.
JUSTICE McDADE delivered the judgment of the court, with opinion. Justices Carter and O'Brien concurred in the judgment.
[¶1] This case is the latest in a long series of pro se appeals filed by respondent Walter Brzowski regarding a 2007 order of protection entered in favor of his ex-wife, petitioner Laura Zasadny (formerly Laura Brzowski). The plenary order of protection was extended several times, and on May 16, 2013, the trial court entered another two-year extension of the order. Respondent appealed. Because the judge who presided over the 2013 extension hearing had previously recused herself from the case, we vacate and remand for further proceedings.
[¶3] In 2003, the circuit court of Cook County entered a judgment of dissolution of marriage between the parties, although in all of his filings both in the trial court and on appeal, respondent denies the validity of that proceeding and insists that he is still legally married to petitioner. Apparently, a plenary ...