Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
19 Illinois opinions name it 2 courts 2004–2026 15 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Illinois courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Hudson v. City of Chicagogreen2 sentences2024In any event, the standard of review is the same. -9- No. 1-22-1088 v. City of Chicago, 228 Ill. 2d 462, 467 (2008). 2024In any event, the standard of review is the same. -9- No. 1-22-1088 any subsequent actions between the same parties or their privies on the same cause of action.” Hudson v. City of Chicago, 228 Ill. 2d 462, 467 (2008). | 2 | 2 |
Provenzale v. Foristergreen2 sentences2014Provenzale v. Forister, 318 Ill. 2014Provenzale v. Forister, 318 Ill. | 2 | 2 |
Borowiec v. GATEWAY 2000, INC.green2 sentences2004The clear language of the statute, along with Illinois case law, makes clear that a section 2-619 motion is only appropriate to attack pleadings, not an order. 735 ILCS 5/2-619 (West 2002); Borowiec v. Gateway 2000, Inc., 209 Ill.2d 376, 382 , 283 Ill.Dec. 669 , 808 N.E.2d 957, 961 (2004) (a section 2-619 motion admits the legal sufficiency of the plaintiff's claim but asserts defects or defenses outside the pleading to defeat the claim); Miller v. Highway Commissioner of North Otter Township Road District, 344 Ill.App.3d 1157, 1164 , 279 Ill.Dec. 925 , 801 N.E.2d 599, 605 (2003) ("[s]ection 2 2004The clear language of the statute, along with Illinois case law, makes clear that a section 2-619 motion is only appropriate to attack pleadings, not an order. 735 ILCS 5/2-619 (West 2002); Borowiec v. Gateway 2000, Inc., 209 Ill.2d 376, 382 , 283 Ill.Dec. 669 , 808 N.E.2d 957, 961 (2004) (a section 2-619 motion admits the legal sufficiency of the plaintiff's claim but asserts defects or defenses outside the pleading to defeat the claim); Miller v. Highway Commissioner of North Otter Township Road District, 344 Ill.App.3d 1157, 1164 , 279 Ill.Dec. 925 , 801 N.E.2d 599, 605 (2003) ("[s]ection 2 | 2 | 2 |
Miller v. HWY. COM'R OF NORTH OTTER TP. RD.green2 sentences2004The clear language of the statute, along with Illinois case law, makes clear that a section 2-619 motion is only appropriate to attack pleadings, not an order. 735 ILCS 5/2-619 (West 2002); Borowiec v. Gateway 2000, Inc., 209 Ill.2d 376, 382 , 283 Ill.Dec. 669 , 808 N.E.2d 957, 961 (2004) (a section 2-619 motion admits the legal sufficiency of the plaintiff's claim but asserts defects or defenses outside the pleading to defeat the claim); Miller v. Highway Commissioner of North Otter Township Road District, 344 Ill.App.3d 1157, 1164 , 279 Ill.Dec. 925 , 801 N.E.2d 599, 605 (2003) ("[s]ection 2 2004The clear language of the statute, along with Illinois case law, makes clear that a section 2-619 motion is only appropriate to attack pleadings, not an order. 735 ILCS 5/2-619 (West 2002); Borowiec v. Gateway 2000, Inc., 209 Ill.2d 376, 382 , 283 Ill.Dec. 669 , 808 N.E.2d 957, 961 (2004) (a section 2-619 motion admits the legal sufficiency of the plaintiff's claim but asserts defects or defenses outside the pleading to defeat the claim); Miller v. Highway Commissioner of North Otter Township Road District, 344 Ill.App.3d 1157, 1164 , 279 Ill.Dec. 925 , 801 N.E.2d 599, 605 (2003) ("[s]ection 2 | 2 | 2 |
Solaia Technology, LLC v. Specialty Publishing Co.green2 sentences2022Solaia Technology, LLC v. Specialty Publishing Co., 221 Ill. 2d 558, 578-79 , (2006). ¶ 14 In this case, the circuit court granted the defendants’ motions to dismiss under both section 2-615 and section 2-619. 2021Solaia Technology, LLC v. Specialty Publishing Co., 221 Ill. 2d 558, 578-79 (2006). ¶ 24 In this case, the circuit court granted defendants’ motion to dismiss under both section 2-615 and section 2-619. | 1 | 2 |
Winters v. Wanglergreen1 sentence2024Id. (quoting Cahokia Unit School District No. 187 v. Pritzker, 2021 IL 126212, ¶ 23 ). ¶ 40 Under section 2-619(a), the movant is essentially stating “ ‘ “Yes, the complaint was legally sufficient, but an affirmative matter exists that defeats the claim.” ’ ” Reynolds v. Jimmy John’s Enterprises, LLC, 2013 IL App (4th) 120139, ¶ 31 (quoting Winters v. Wangler, 386 Ill. | 1 | 1 |
Reynolds v. Jimmy John's Enterprises, LLCgreen1 sentence2024Id. (quoting Cahokia Unit School District No. 187 v. Pritzker, 2021 IL 126212, ¶ 23 ). ¶ 40 Under section 2-619(a), the movant is essentially stating “ ‘ “Yes, the complaint was legally sufficient, but an affirmative matter exists that defeats the claim.” ’ ” Reynolds v. Jimmy John’s Enterprises, LLC, 2013 IL App (4th) 120139, ¶ 31 (quoting Winters v. Wangler, 386 Ill. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Illinois. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Cahokia Unit School District No. 187 v. Pritzker
green
2 sentences2026“A motion to dismiss under section 2-615 challenges the legal sufficiency of the plaintiff’s claim, while a motion to dismiss under section 2-619 admits the legal sufficiency of the claim but asserts defenses or defects outside the pleading to defeat the claim.” Cahokia Unit School District No. 187 v. Pritzker, 2021 IL 126212, ¶ 23 . ¶ 11 Section 2-619 provides that a defendant may move for dismissal of an action based on various enumerated defenses or on the basis that “the claim asserted against defendant is barred by other affirmative matter avoiding the legal effect of or defeating the cla 2026“A motion to dismiss under section 2-615 challenges the legal sufficiency of the plaintiff’s claim, while a motion to dismiss under section 2-619 admits the legal sufficiency of the claim but asserts defenses or defects outside the pleading to defeat the claim.” Cahokia Unit School District No. 187 v. Pritzker, 2021 IL 126212, ¶ 23 . | 12 | 2023–2026 |
Rehfield v. Diocese of Joliet
green
2 sentences2026If the grounds for dismissal are not apparent from the face of the pleading raising the challenged claim, “the motion shall be supported by affidavit.” Id. § 2-619(a). ¶ 12 Our supreme court has offered the following description of the function of section 2-619 motions and the process for deciding them: “Section 2-619 of the Code [citation] provides a means for a defendant to obtain a summary dismissal of issues of law or easily proved issues of fact. [Citation.] A motion to dismiss filed under subsection 2-619(a)(9) (735 ILCS 5/2-619(a)(9) (West 2016)) *** raises an affirmative defense or oth 2023When ruling on a section 2-615 motion to dismiss, “a court must determine whether the facts alleged in the complaint, viewed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff and taking all well-pleaded facts as true, are sufficient to state a cause of action upon which relief may be granted.” Rehfield v. Diocese of Joliet, 2021 IL 125656, ¶ 20 , 182 N.E.3d 123 . | 2 | 2023–2026 |
Kopf v. Kelly
green
2 sentences2025“A motion to dismiss under section 2-615 challenges the legal sufficiency of the plaintiff’s claim, while a motion to dismiss under section 2-619 admits the legal sufficiency of the claim but asserts defenses or defects outside the pleading to defeat the claim.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Id. 2024Id. (quoting Cahokia Unit School District No. 187 v. Pritzker, 2021 IL 126212, ¶ 23 ). ¶ 40 Under section 2-619(a), the movant is essentially stating “ ‘ “Yes, the complaint was legally sufficient, but an affirmative matter exists that defeats the claim.” ’ ” Reynolds v. Jimmy John’s Enterprises, LLC, 2013 IL App (4th) 120139, ¶ 31 (quoting Winters v. Wangler, 386 Ill. | 2 | 2024–2025 |
In re Parentage of D.S.
green
1 sentence2026If the grounds for dismissal are not apparent from the face of the pleading raising the challenged claim, “the motion shall be supported by affidavit.” Id. § 2-619(a). ¶ 12 Our supreme court has offered the following description of the function of section 2-619 motions and the process for deciding them: “Section 2-619 of the Code [citation] provides a means for a defendant to obtain a summary dismissal of issues of law or easily proved issues of fact. [Citation.] A motion to dismiss filed under subsection 2-619(a)(9) (735 ILCS 5/2-619(a)(9) (West 2016)) *** raises an affirmative defense or oth | 1 | 2026–2026 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.