two-year requirement in Illinois

2011Respondent asserted In re Estate of Rice, 154 Ill.App.3d 591 , 107 Ill.Dec. 414 , 507 N.E.2d 78 (1987), which held section 13-207 applied to a counterclaim filed two years *464 after the death of the decedent, was applicable in this case. ¶ 43 The heirs replied that the amended citation for recovery of assets was not a new action filed against respondent, but a continuation of the action for accounting filed four years earlier.

2011Respondent asserted In re Estate of Rice, 154 Ill.App.3d 591 , 107 Ill.Dec. 414 , 507 N.E.2d 78 (1987), which held section 13-207 applied to a counterclaim filed two years *464 after the death of the decedent, was applicable in this case. ¶ 43 The heirs replied that the amended citation for recovery of assets was not a new action filed against respondent, but a continuation of the action for accounting filed four years earlier.

2001In denying Dial's motion for reconsideration, the court relied upon Harvey Fruit Market, Inc. v. Hartford Insurance Co. , 294 Ill.

2001In denying Dial’s motion for reconsideration, the court relied upon Harvey Fruit Market, Inc. v. Hartford Insurance Co., 294 Ill.

2013Applying Sarkissian here, not only do we not need to discuss whether defendants satisfied the general elements in order to prove up their section 2-1401 petition since they are irrelevant (and which, in fact, neither party addressed on appeal), but we also do not need to discuss the parties’ arguments regarding the two-year bar of section 2-1401(c), since it, too, does not apply.3 ¶ 18 With that said, we turn now to our recent decision of Deutsche Bank National Trust Co. v. Brewer, 2012 IL App (1st) 111213 , which is very similar to the instant cause and provides much guidance here.

1995(See Universal Outdoor, Inc. v. City of Des Plaines (1992), 236 Ill.

1995App. 3d 242 , 364 N.E.2d 922 .) Our courts have not hesitated to refuse to entertain section 2 — 1401 petitions filed within the two-year requirement when it appeared from the record that unreasonable delay had occurred.

1981(Mosby v. Michael Reese Hospital (1964), 49 Ill.

1979Thereafter the Montana court decided similarly in Ronchetto v. Ronchetto (Mont. 1977), 567 P.2d 456, 457 , and found that the proceeding in dispute “dealt only with clarification of plaintiff’s visitation rights and not with child custody.” The following year in Olson v. Olson (Mont. 1978), 574 P.2d 1004 , the Montana court considered again the application of the two-year rule to motions for modification of visitation rights and came to the same conclusion in express ágreement with the Manson decision, this time finding that the lower court had in fact modified the original custody judgment wi

1979Thereafter the Montana court decided similarly in Ronchetto v. Ronchetto (Mont. 1977), 567 P.2d 456, 457 , and found that the proceeding in dispute “dealt only with clarification of plaintiff’s visitation rights and not with child custody.” The following year in Olson v. Olson (Mont. 1978), 574 P.2d 1004 , the Montana court considered again the application of the two-year rule to motions for modification of visitation rights and came to the same conclusion in express ágreement with the Manson decision, this time finding that the lower court had in fact modified the original custody judgment wi

1979The court cautioned that “[l]abeling this ‘visitation’ does not change its substance which is ‘custody.’ ” 574 P.2d 1004, 1007 .

1969Co., 404 SW2d 490 (1966), and others, do not persuade us that we should depart from the long line of Illinois cases interpreting the two-year requirement of suit in a wrongful-death case as a condition of liability.

1953Harding v. Chicago & North Western Railway Co. 413 Ill. 93 , relied upon by appellant, we had before us facts showing that for four successive years the school board had transferred from the building fund to the educational fund a sum which was several times the amount of the normal two-year requirement for the building fund; that each year the board levied a large amount looking toward the construction of improvements which were contemplated but never undertaken.