section 13-205 five year statute of limitations in Illinois

2020Khan v. Deutsche Bank AG, 2012 IL 112219, ¶ 19 .

2016Section 13-205 provides that the limitations period commences when the cause of action “accrues,” or when “facts exist that authorize the bringing of a cause of action.” Khan v. Deutsche Bank AG, 2012 IL 112219, ¶ 20 .

2016Rather, such construction-based claims would still be governed by both the five-year statute of limitations in section 13-205 of the Code (735 ILCS 5/13-205 (West 2010); Gillespie, 2014 IL 115330, ¶ 41 ), and the discovery rule that provides that a party’s cause of action accrues when a party knows or reasonably should know of an injury and that it was wrongfully caused (Clay, 189 Ill. 2d at 608 ). ¶ 37 Before this court, defendants first argue that plaintiffs failed to establish fraudulent concealment of their cause of action.

2015Rather, such construction-based claims would still be governed by both the five-year statute of limitations in section 13-205 of the Code (735 ILCS 5/13-205 (West 2010); Gillespie, 2014 IL 115330, ¶ 41 ), and the discovery rule that provides that a party’s cause of action accrues when a party knows or reasonably should know of an injury and that it was wrongfully caused (Clay, 189 Ill. 2d at 608 ). ¶ 37 Before this court, defendants first argue that plaintiffs failed to establish fraudulent concealment of their cause of action.

2016Rather, such construction-based claims would still be governed by both the five-year statute of limitations in section 13-205 of the Code (735 ILCS 5/13-205 (West 2010); Gillespie, 2014 IL 115330, ¶ 41 ), and the discovery rule that provides that a party’s cause of action accrues when a party knows or reasonably should know of an injury and that it was wrongfully caused (Clay, 189 Ill. 2d at 608 ). ¶ 37 Before this court, defendants first argue that plaintiffs failed to establish fraudulent concealment of their cause of action.

2015Rather, such construction-based claims would still be governed by both the five-year statute of limitations in section 13-205 of the Code (735 ILCS 5/13-205 (West 2010); Gillespie, 2014 IL 115330, ¶ 41 ), and the discovery rule that provides that a party’s cause of action accrues when a party knows or reasonably should know of an injury and that it was wrongfully caused (Clay, 189 Ill. 2d at 608 ). ¶ 37 Before this court, defendants first argue that plaintiffs failed to establish fraudulent concealment of their cause of action.

2015Id. ¶ 39 In response, plaintiff argues that any statute of limitation here could only begin to run against him when he attempted to lodge the assignments of beneficial interest in the trusts with the trustee in 2013, a time within the statute of limitations.

2015Id. ¶ 39 In response, plaintiff argues that any statute of limitation here could only begin to run against him when he attempted to lodge the assignments of beneficial interest in the trusts with the trustee in 2013, a time within the statute of limitations.

2015Id.

2015Id.

2025In reply, plaintiff argues that “the specific demarcation of these Non-Construction Claims *** as opposed to the damaged [sic] caused by the Miller Construction project or the Construction Claims were raised and made clear so they were certainly not waived on this appeal.” ¶ 64 “Since the officers of a condominium association and the members of its board owe a fiduciary duty to the members of the association, if the officers and directors fail to act in a manner reasonably related to the exercise of that duty, liability will result not only for the association but also for the individuals them

2023Section 13-205 of the Code provides, in pertinent part, “actions on unwritten contracts, expressed or implied, *** and all civil actions not otherwise provided for, shall be commenced within 5 years next after the cause of action accrued.” Id. § 13-205.

2023See Sundance Homes, 195 Ill. 2d at 284 ; Seaman, 325 Ill. App. 3d at 565 ; Tri State Tours, Inc., 342 Ill. App. 3d at 848 . ¶ 38 E.

2023Our appellate court held, “[b]ecause the [Wage Payment and Collection] Act does not provide for a statute of limitations, the five year ‘catch-all’ limitations period found in section 13-205 is applicable to actions brought under the [Wage Payment and Collection] Act.” Tri State Tours, Inc., 342 Ill. App. 3d at 848 . ¶ 37 Applying the same reasoning in the aforementioned cases to the case on review, we find that, because the Act does not have its own limitations period; because the subsections are causes of action “not otherwise provided for”; and because we must ensure certainty, predictabili

2023While plaintiffs stress specific statutory provisions control over general ones (see LLC 1 05333303020 v. Gil, 2020 IL App (1st) 191225, ¶ 23 , 186 N.E.3d 904 ), plaintiffs have provided no specific statutory provision that renders section 13-205’s catchall limitations period -10- inapplicable.

2021Sharpe v. Westmoreland, 2020 IL 124863, ¶ 6 . ¶ 18 A. Limitation Statutes ¶ 19 The applicability of a statute of limitation to a cause of action presents a legal question subject to de novo review, and the sole concern in determining which limitation period applies is ascertaining and effectuating the legislature’s intent.

2018Section 13-205’s limitations period begins to run when the cause of action “accrues.” Id.

2015They contend that plaintiffs were required to allege affirmative acts by defendants that occurred after the allegedly tortious acts (i.e., the misrepresentations in the packet and the breach of fiduciary duty in connection with the reserve fund) that were calculated to induce defendants into delaying the filing of their claims or preventing them from discovering their claims. 3 3 Defendants additionally argue that the appellate court erred in relying upon cases that discuss the tort of fraudulent concealment (see 2014 IL App (1st) 130764, ¶¶ 99-103 (discussing Fichtel v. Board of Directors of

2015Id. at 951 .

2014Id. ¶ 44 The Village of Fox Lake court held that although section 13-214 was the proper statute to consider in determining whether the Village’s fraud claims were timely filed, the trial court erred in holding that those claims were time barred.

2012Id. at 597 .

2012Khan II, 408 Ill.

2008Dec. 378 , 673 N.E.2d 290 (1996), this court considered whether the 10-year statute of limitations in section 13-206 for actions on a written contract or the 5-year statute of limitations in section 13-205 for "all civil actions not otherwise provided for" applied to a cause of action alleging breach of an implied duty.

2008In Armstrong , this court began its analysis by noting that "[t]he determination of the applicable statute of limitations is governed by the type of injury at issue, irrespective of the pleader's designation of the nature of the action." Armstrong, 174 Ill.2d at 286 , 220 Ill.Dec. 378 , 673 N.E.2d 290 .