74 Illinois opinions name it 2 courts 1976–2026 12 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 |
|---|---|---|
Donaldson, Lufkin & Jenrette Futures, Inc. v. Barrgreen2 sentences2023Our court has held that a three-pronged approach applies: “(1) if it is clear that the dispute falls within the scope of the arbitration clause or agreement, the court must compel arbitration; (2) if it is clear that the dispute does not fall within the arbitration clause or agreement, the court must deny the motion -10- 1-22-1804 to compel; and (3) if it unclear or ambiguous whether the dispute falls within the scope of the arbitration clause, the matter should be referred to the arbitrator to deicide arbitrability.” Id. (citing Donaldson, Lufkin & Jenrette Futures, Inc. v. Barr, 124 Ill. 2d 2022“The paramount factor in determining the parties’ intention [with regard to an arbitration agreement] is the scope of the arbitration clause[.]” Donaldson, Lufkin & Jenrette Futures, Inc. v. Barr, 124 Ill. 2d 435, 443 (1988). ¶ 56 Alliant characterizes the arbitration clause as a “generic” provision, which are generally construed broadly by the courts. | 16 | 33 |
Salsitz v. Kreissgreen2 sentences2004The courts can determine the issue of arbitrability and compel arbitration when “ ‘the language of the arbitration agreement is clear[ ] and it is apparent that the dispute sought to be arbitrated falls within the scope of the arbitration clause.’ ” Salsitz v. Kreiss, 198 Ill. 2d 1, 9 , 761 N.E.2d 724, 728 (2001), quoting Donaldson, Lufkin & Jenrette Futures, Inc. v. Barr, 124 Ill. 2d 435, 445 , 530 N.E.2d 439, 443 (1988). 2004The courts can determine the issue of arbitrability and compel arbitration when “ ‘the language of the arbitration agreement is clear[ ] and it is apparent that the dispute sought to be arbitrated falls within the scope of the arbitration clause.’ ” Salsitz v. Kreiss, 198 Ill. 2d 1, 9 , 761 N.E.2d 724, 728 (2001), quoting Donaldson, Lufkin & Jenrette Futures, Inc. v. Barr, 124 Ill. 2d 435, 445 , 530 N.E.2d 439, 443 (1988). | 5 | 5 |
Jensen v. Quik Internationalgreen2 sentences2018App. 3d 844 , 846, 26 Ill.Dec. 494 , 388 N.E.2d 118 (1979) ("[w]hether the alleged breach of the agreement and the resulting damages are within the scope of the arbitration clause is for the arbitrator to decide"; otherwise, "one could avoid complying with arbitration clauses by merely alleging that the other party breached or repudiated the contract"); *893 Jensen v. Quik International , 213 Ill. 2d 119 , 129, 289 Ill.Dec. 686 , 820 N.E.2d 462 (2004) (finding that the question of whether the plaintiff was entitled to rescission of the agreement due to violations of statutory requirements was 2018App. 3d 844 , 846, 26 Ill.Dec. 494 , 388 N.E.2d 118 (1979) ("[w]hether the alleged breach of the agreement and the resulting damages are within the scope of the arbitration clause is for the arbitrator to decide"; otherwise, "one could avoid complying with arbitration clauses by merely alleging that the other party breached or repudiated the contract"); *893 Jensen v. Quik International , 213 Ill. 2d 119 , 129, 289 Ill.Dec. 686 , 820 N.E.2d 462 (2004) (finding that the question of whether the plaintiff was entitled to rescission of the agreement due to violations of statutory requirements was | 3 | 4 |
Travis v. American Manufacturers Mutual Insurancegreen2 sentences2026App. 3d 173, 180 (2007). “ ‘If the language of an arbitration agreement is clear and it is obvious that the dispute desired to be arbitrated falls within the scope of the arbitration clause, the court should compel arbitration.’ ” Id. (quoting Travis, 335 Ill. 2020App. 3d 173, 180 (2007). “ ‘If the language of an arbitration agreement is clear and it is obvious that the dispute desired to be arbitrated falls within the scope of the arbitration clause, the court should compel arbitration.’ ” Id. (quoting Travis v. American Manufacturers Mutual Insurance Co., 335 Ill. | 2 | 5 |
Caudle v. Sears, Roebuck and Co.green2 sentences2002Caudle v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 245 Ill. 2002Caudle v. Sears, Roebuck & Co. , 245 Ill. | 2 | 3 |
Buckeye Check Cashing, Inc. v. Cardegnagreen2 sentences2021See Buckeye Check Cashing, Inc. v. Cardegna, 546 U.S. 440, 444-46 (2006); Jensen v. Quik International, 213 Ill. 2d 119, 123-24 (2004). 2021See Buckeye Check Cashing, Inc. v. Cardegna, 546 U.S. 440, 444-46 (2006); -8- Jensen v. Quik International, 213 Ill. 2d 119, 123-24 (2004). | 2 | 2 |
Ozdeger v. Altaygreen2 sentences2011See Ozdeger v. Altay, 66 Ill.App.3d 629, 632 , 23 Ill.Dec. 446 , 384 N.E.2d 82 (1978) (holding subsequent oral agreement dealing with carpentry management was within scope of written contract's arbitration clause, which applied to "all disputes arising out of the subject matter of the contract, that is, the construction of plaintiffs' home"). ¶ 21 The dispute over the validity of the membership assignment is arbitrable, and the circuit court erred in denying plaintiff's motion to compel arbitration. 2011See Ozdeger v. Altay, 66 Ill.App.3d 629, 632 , 23 Ill.Dec. 446 , 384 N.E.2d 82 (1978) (holding subsequent oral agreement dealing with carpentry management was within scope of written contract's arbitration clause, which applied to "all disputes arising out of the subject matter of the contract, that is, the construction of plaintiffs' home"). ¶ 21 The dispute over the validity of the membership assignment is arbitrable, and the circuit court erred in denying plaintiff's motion to compel arbitration. | 2 | 2 |
Guarantee Trust Life Insurance Co. v. Platinum Supplemental Insurance, Inc.green2 sentences2023Our court has held that a three-pronged approach applies: “(1) if it is clear that the dispute falls within the scope of the arbitration clause or agreement, the court must compel arbitration; (2) if it is clear that the dispute does not fall within the arbitration clause or agreement, the court must deny the motion -10- 1-22-1804 to compel; and (3) if it unclear or ambiguous whether the dispute falls within the scope of the arbitration clause, the matter should be referred to the arbitrator to deicide arbitrability.” Id. (citing Donaldson, Lufkin & Jenrette Futures, Inc. v. Barr, 124 Ill. 2d 2018"In making that determination, a three-pronged approach is used: (1) if it is clear that the dispute falls within the scope of the arbitration clause or agreement, the court must compel arbitration; (2) if it is clear that the dispute does not fall within the arbitration clause or agreement, the court must deny the motion to compel; and (3) if it is unclear or ambiguous whether the dispute falls within the scope of the arbitration clause, the matter should be referred to the arbitrator to decide arbitrability." Guarantee Trust Life Insurance Co. v. Platinum Supplemental Insurance, Inc. , 2016 | 1 | 4 |
Mastrobuono v. Shearson Lehman Hutton, Inc.green2 sentences2022These include whether the parties agreed to arbitration (arbitrability), whether the agreement covers a particular controversy (scope) (id.), and whether the arbitration clause is enforceable as a whole (validity). 1 Rent-A-Center, West, Inc. v. Jackson, 561 U.S. 63, 74-76 (2010). “ ‘[A]mbiguities as to the scope of the arbitration clause’ ” are resolved in favor of arbitration given “ ‘the federal policy favoring arbitration.’ ” Mastrobuono v. Shearson Lehman Hutton, Inc., 514 U.S. 52, 62 (1995) (quoting Volt Information Sciences, Inc. v. Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior Univer 1998Mastrobuono, 514 U.S. at 62 , 131 L. | 1 | 3 |
Volt Info. Sciences, Inc. v. Bd. of Trustees of Leland Stanford Jr. U.green2 sentences2022These include whether the parties agreed to arbitration (arbitrability), whether the agreement covers a particular controversy (scope) (id.), and whether the arbitration clause is enforceable as a whole (validity). 1 Rent-A-Center, West, Inc. v. Jackson, 561 U.S. 63, 74-76 (2010). “ ‘[A]mbiguities as to the scope of the arbitration clause’ ” are resolved in favor of arbitration given “ ‘the federal policy favoring arbitration.’ ” Mastrobuono v. Shearson Lehman Hutton, Inc., 514 U.S. 52, 62 (1995) (quoting Volt Information Sciences, Inc. v. Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior Univer 1998Mastrobuono, 514 U.S. at 62 , 115 S.Ct. at 1218 , 131 L.Ed.2d at 87 , citing Volt Information Sciences, Inc. v. Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University, 489 U.S. 468 , 109 S.Ct. 1248 , 103 L.Ed.2d 488 (1989). | 1 | 2 |
Board of Managers of the Courtyards at the Woodlands Condominium Ass'n v. Iko Chicago, Inc.green2 sentences2018"In making that determination, a three-pronged approach is used: (1) if it is clear that the dispute falls within the scope of the arbitration clause or agreement, the court must compel arbitration; (2) if it is clear that the dispute does not fall within the arbitration clause or agreement, the court must deny the motion to compel; and (3) if it is unclear or ambiguous whether the dispute falls within the scope of the arbitration clause, the matter should be referred to the arbitrator to decide arbitrability." Guarantee Trust Life Insurance Co. v. Platinum Supplemental Insurance, Inc. , 2016 2018"In making that determination, a three-pronged approach is used: (1) if it is clear that the dispute falls within the scope of the arbitration clause or agreement, the court must compel arbitration; (2) if it is clear that the dispute does not fall within the arbitration clause or agreement, the court must deny the motion to compel; and (3) if it is unclear or ambiguous whether the dispute falls within the scope of the arbitration clause, the matter should be referred to the arbitrator to decide arbitrability." Guarantee Trust Life Insurance Co. v. Platinum Supplemental Insurance, Inc. , 2016 | 1 | 2 |
Garver v. Fergusongreen2 sentences2018App. 3d 844 , 846, 26 Ill.Dec. 494 , 388 N.E.2d 118 (1979) ("[w]hether the alleged breach of the agreement and the resulting damages are within the scope of the arbitration clause is for the arbitrator to decide"; otherwise, "one could avoid complying with arbitration clauses by merely alleging that the other party breached or repudiated the contract"); *893 Jensen v. Quik International , 213 Ill. 2d 119 , 129, 289 Ill.Dec. 686 , 820 N.E.2d 462 (2004) (finding that the question of whether the plaintiff was entitled to rescission of the agreement due to violations of statutory requirements was 2018App. 3d 844 , 846, 26 Ill.Dec. 494 , 388 N.E.2d 118 (1979) ("[w]hether the alleged breach of the agreement and the resulting damages are within the scope of the arbitration clause is for the arbitrator to decide"; otherwise, "one could avoid complying with arbitration clauses by merely alleging that the other party breached or repudiated the contract"); *893 Jensen v. Quik International , 213 Ill. 2d 119 , 129, 289 Ill.Dec. 686 , 820 N.E.2d 462 (2004) (finding that the question of whether the plaintiff was entitled to rescission of the agreement due to violations of statutory requirements was | 1 | 2 |
Khan v. BDO Seidman, LLPgreen2 sentences2015By interfering with, or compromising the integrity of, this process of legal review by a third party, BDO went outside its field of activity as contemplated by the consulting agreement and, therefore, outside the scope of the arbitration clause." Id. 2012Khan I, 404 Ill. | 1 | 2 |
Suburban Auto Rebuilders, Inc. v. Associated Tile Dealers Warehouse, Inc.green1 sentence2026All contracts must be considered in their entirety and must also be objectively interpreted considering “the ordinary expectations of reasonable people.” Suburban Auto Rebuilders, Inc. v. Associated Tile Dealers Warehouse, Inc., 388 Ill. | 1 | 1 |
Tortoriello v. Gerald Nissan of North Aurora, Inc.green1 sentence2023Tortoriello v. Gerald Nissan of North Aurora, Inc., 379 Ill. | 1 | 1 |
| Rent-A-Center, West, Inc. v. Jacksongreen | 1 | 1 |
| MHR Estate Plan, LLC v. K&G Partnershipgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Green v. Bank One La Grangegreen | 1 | 1 |
| LAS, INC. v. Mini-Tankers, USA, Inc.green | 1 | 1 |
| Grevas v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.green | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Illinois. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
School District No. 46 v. Del Bianco
green
2 sentences1988School District No. 46 v. Del Bianco (1966), 68 Ill. 1985Defendants cite supporting case authority both in the commercial context ( School District No. 46 v. Del Bianco (1966), 68 Ill. | 4 | 1978–1988 |
Griffith v. Wilmette Harbor Ass'n, Inc.
green
2 sentences2026App. 3d 173, 180 (2007). “ ‘If the language of an arbitration agreement is clear and it is obvious that the dispute desired to be arbitrated falls within the scope of the arbitration clause, the court should compel arbitration.’ ” Id. (quoting Travis, 335 Ill. 2020App. 3d 173, 180 (2007). “ ‘If the language of an arbitration agreement is clear and it is obvious that the dispute desired to be arbitrated falls within the scope of the arbitration clause, the court should compel arbitration.’ ” Id. (quoting Travis v. American Manufacturers Mutual Insurance Co., 355 Ill. | 3 | 2020–2026 |
Hartz v. Brehm Preparatory School, Inc.
green
2 sentences2025Hartz v. Brehm Preparatory School, Inc., 2021 IL App (5th) 190327 , ¶ 42. ¶ 30 Illinois considers arbitration to be a favored method of dispute resolution. 2024Hartz v. Brehm Preparatory School, Inc., 2021 IL App (5th) 190327, ¶ 42 . ¶ 17 Under Illinois law, when determining whether the parties agreed to arbitrate the dispute, the circuit court is to use a three-pronged approach: “(i) if it is clear that the dispute falls within the scope of the arbitration clause or agreement, the court must compel arbitration, (ii) if it is clear that the dispute does not fall within the arbitration clause or agreement, the court must deny the motion to compel, and (iii) if it is unclear or ambiguous whether the dispute falls within the scope of the arbitration cla | 3 | 2023–2025 |
Liu v. Four Seasons Hotel, Ltd.
green
2 sentences2024Hartz v. Brehm Preparatory School, Inc., 2021 IL App (5th) 190327, ¶ 42 . ¶ 17 Under Illinois law, when determining whether the parties agreed to arbitrate the dispute, the circuit court is to use a three-pronged approach: “(i) if it is clear that the dispute falls within the scope of the arbitration clause or agreement, the court must compel arbitration, (ii) if it is clear that the dispute does not fall within the arbitration clause or agreement, the court must deny the motion to compel, and (iii) if it is unclear or ambiguous whether the dispute falls within the scope of the arbitration cla 2023Under Illinois law, when determining whether the parties agreed to arbitrate the dispute, the circuit court is to use a three- pronged approach: “(i) if it is clear that the dispute falls within the scope of the arbitration clause or agreement, the court must compel arbitration, (ii) if it is clear that the dispute does not fall within the arbitration clause or agreement, the court must deny the motion to compel, and (iii) if it is unclear or ambiguous whether the dispute falls within the scope of the arbitration clause, the matter should be referred to the arbitrator to decide arbitrability.” | 2 | 2023–2024 |
Beider v. Eugene Matanky & Associates, Inc.
neutral
2 sentences2014Id. at 359 . - 12 - Defendants assert that this provision has been interpreted to mean that an arbitrator may not award attorney fees unless the arbitration agreement provides for fees. 1982App. 3d 354 , 371 N.E.2d 29 , defendant contends that the issue of termination of the arbitration agreement was within the scope of the arbitration clause and therefore should have been decided by the arbitrator. | 2 | 1982–2014 |
Diersen v. Joe Keim Builders, Inc.
green
2 sentences2011Id. ¶ 27 Here, similar to Diersen, plaintiff is challenging the validity of the membership assignment, not the existence of the arbitration clause in the operating agreement. 2011Id. ¶ 27 Here, similar to Diersen , plaintiff is challenging the validity of the membership assignment, not the existence of the arbitration clause in the operating agreement. | 2 | 2011–2011 |
Prima Paint Corp. v. Flood & Conklin Mfg. Co.
green
2 sentences2010Because breach is a failure to perform, the scope of the arbitration clause might be expressed more simply as "claims relating to the performance of the consulting agreement." It is important to realize that the arbitration clause in this case is more narrow than the typical arbitration clause, such as the one in Prima Paint, 388 U.S. at 398 , 87 S.Ct. at 1803 , 18 L.Ed.2d at 1274 , which referred to "`any controversy or claim arising out of or relating to this Agreement.'" The broader clause in Prima Paint would encompass extra-contractual claims, such as fraud in the inducement of the contra 2010Because breach is a failure to perform, the scope of the arbitration clause might be expressed more simply as "claims relating to the performance of the consulting agreement." It is important to realize that the arbitration clause in this case is more narrow than the typical arbitration clause, such as the one in Prima Paint, 388 U.S. at 398 , 87 S.Ct. at 1803 , 18 L.Ed.2d at 1274 , which referred to "`any controversy or claim arising out of or relating to this Agreement.'" The broader clause in Prima Paint would encompass extra-contractual claims, such as fraud in the inducement of the contra | 2 | 2010–2010 |
Reed v. Doctor's Associates, Inc.
green
2 sentences2005Reed v. Doctor's Associates, Inc. , 331 Ill. 2005Reed v. Doctor’s Associates, Inc., 331 Ill. | 2 | 2005–2005 |
Hanke v. American International South Insurance
green
2 sentences2005The court found that the dispute at issue does not fall within the scope of the arbitration clause in the service agreement because (1) the plaintiff's complaint alleges fraud, to which this court found appraisal clauses to be inapplicable in Hanke v. American International South Insurance Co. , 335 Ill. 2005The court found that the dispute at issue does not fall within the scope of the arbitration clause in the service agreement because (1) the plaintiffs complaint alleges fraud, to which this court found appraisal clauses to be inapplicable in Hanke v. American International South Insurance Co., 335 Ill. | 2 | 2005–2005 |
City of Centralia v. Natkin & Co.
green
2 sentences2002City of Centralia, 257 Ill. 2002City of Centralia , 257 Ill. | 2 | 2002–2002 |
Nelson for Soller v. ROGER J. LANGE
green
2 sentences2000App. 3d. 909, 594 N.E.2d 391 , (1992), the court held that a claim of fraud in the inducement of a contract was within the scope of the arbitration clause contained in that contract and that therefore the arbitration clause in this case is broad enough to encompass all of plaintiff's claims, including that the arbitration clause is invalid due to violations of the ISL. 2000App. 3d 909 , 594 N.E.2d 391 (1992), the court held that a claim of fraud in the inducement of a contract was within the scope of the arbitration clause contained in that contract and that therefore the arbitration clause in this case is broad enough to encompass all of plaintiffs claims, including that the arbitration clause is invalid due to violations of the Securities Law. | 2 | 2000–2000 |
Roosevelt University v. Mayfair Construction Co.
green
2 sentences1987It then found that the arbitration clause "All claims, disputes, and other matters in question arising out of or relating to this Contract" was even broader than the generic provision "all disputes arising in connection with this contract." Therefore, it reasoned that certain disputes, even if not explicitly covered in the original contract, were within the scope of the arbitration clause. 28 Ill. 1987It then found that the arbitration clause “All claims, disputes, and other matters in question arising out of or relating to this Contract” was even broader than the generic provision “all disputes arising in connection with this contract.” Therefore, it reasoned that certain disputes, even if not explicitly covered in the original contract, were within the scope of the arbitration clause. 28 Ill. | 2 | 1987–1988 |
Radiant Star Enterprises, L.L.C. v. Metropolis Condominium Association
green
1 sentence2026The court must compel arbitration “if it is clear that the dispute falls within the scope of the arbitration clause or agreement.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Radiant Star Enterprises, L.L.C. v. Metropolis Condominium Ass’n, 2018 IL App (1st) 171844 , ¶ 52. | 1 | 2026–2026 |
Brookner v. General Motors Corp.
green
1 sentence2026Moreover, “[a]t a hearing to compel arbitration, the only issue for the trial court is whether an agreement exists to arbitrate the dispute in question.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Brookner v. General Motors Corp., 2019 IL App (3d) 170629 , ¶ 17. | 1 | 2026–2026 |
Clanton v. Oakbrook Healthcare Centre, Ltd.
green
1 sentence2023Our court has held that a three-pronged approach applies: “(1) if it is clear that the dispute falls within the scope of the arbitration clause or agreement, the court must compel arbitration; (2) if it is clear that the dispute does not fall within the arbitration clause or agreement, the court must deny the motion -10- 1-22-1804 to compel; and (3) if it unclear or ambiguous whether the dispute falls within the scope of the arbitration clause, the matter should be referred to the arbitrator to deicide arbitrability.” Id. (citing Donaldson, Lufkin & Jenrette Futures, Inc. v. Barr, 124 Ill. 2d | 1 | 2023–2023 |
| State Farm Fire and Casualty Company v. Watts Regulator Company green | 1 | 2022–2022 |
| Stuart-Dean Co. v. Lurie green | 1 | 2018–2018 |
| Keeley & Sons, Inc. v. Zurich American Insurance green | 1 | 2017–2017 |
| Fiala v. Bickford Senior Living Group, LLC green | 1 | 2017–2017 |
| Johnson v. Noble green | 1 | 1994–1994 |
| United Cable Television Corp. v. Northwest Illinois Cable Corp. green | 1 | 1994–1994 |
| Atkins v. Rustic Woods Partners green | 1 | 1993–1993 |
| D.E. Wright Electric, Inc. v. Henry Ross Construction Co. green | 1 | 1993–1993 |
| Gold Coast Mall, Inc. v. Larmar Corp. green | 1 | 1992–1992 |
| At&T Technologies, Inc. v. Communications Workers green | 1 | 1992–1992 |
| J&K Cement Construction, Inc. v. Montalbano Builders, Inc. green | 1 | 1988–1988 |
| Board of Trustees v. Cook County College Teachers Union, Local 1600 green | 1 | 1988–1988 |
| Farris v. Hedgepeth green | 1 | 1987–1987 |
| International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 150 v. Flair Builders, Inc. green | 1 | 1985–1985 |
| J. F. Inc. v. Vicik green | 1 | 1985–1985 |
| International Union United Automobile, Aerospace And Agriculture Implement Workers Of America, Uaw v. Lester Engineering Company green | 1 | 1984–1984 |
| Wilcox Co. v. Bouramas green | 1 | 1980–1980 |
| Butler Products Company, an Illinois Corporation, George W. Butler and Gladys A. Butler v. Unistrut Corporation, a Michigan Corporation green | 1 | 1979–1979 |
| Harrison F. Blades, Inc. v. Jarman Memorial Hospital Building Fund, Inc. green | 1 | 1976–1976 |
| Flood v. Country Mutual Insurance green | 1 | 1976–1976 |
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.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.