ILCS » Chapter 230 · Act 10
Illinois Compiled Statutes

230 ILCS 10/17.1 (2026)

Judicial review

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IL-ILGAilga.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(230 ILCS 10/17.1) (from Ch. 120, par. 2417.1)
    Sec. 17.1. Judicial review.
    (a) Jurisdiction and venue for the judicial review of a final order of the Board relating to licensed owners, suppliers, organization gaming licensees, and special event licenses is vested in the Appellate Court of the judicial district in which Sangamon County is located. A petition for judicial review of a final order of the Board must be filed in the Appellate Court, within 35 days from the date that a copy of the decision sought to be reviewed was served upon the party affected by the decision.
    (b) Judicial review of all other final orders of the Board shall be conducted in accordance with the Administrative Review Law.
(Source: P.A. 101-31, eff. 6-28-19.)

    
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1994–2024 · leading case: J&J Ventures Gaming, LLC v. Wild, Inc., 2016 IL 119870 (Ill. 2016).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
J&J Ventures Gaming, LLC v. Wild, Inc., 2016 IL 119870 (Ill. 2016). “230 ILCS 10/17.1 (West 2014); 230 ILCS 40/80 (West 2014).”
J&J Ventures Gaming, LLC v. Wild, Inc, 2016 IL 119870 (Ill. 2017). “230 ILCS 10/17.1 (West 2014); 230 ILCS 40/80 (West 2014).”
Emerald Casino, Inc. v. Illinois Gaming Bd., 852 N.E.2d 512 (Ill. App. Ct. 2006). · cites it 2× “230 ILCS 10/17.1(a) (West 2004). It referred to its petition as “seeking administrative review of a final order of the Illinois Gaming Board.”
J&J Ventures Gaming, LLC v. Wild, Inc., 2015 IL App (5th) 140092 (Ill. App. Ct. 2015). “” 230 ILCS 10/17.1(b) (West 2012). ¶ 53 Read as a whole, this statutory scheme, which encompasses the provisions of the Riverboat Gambling Act, evidences the legislature’s explicit intent that the Gaming Board have exclusive power over the gaming industry in order to preserve…”
C.Capp's LLC v. Jaffe, 2014 IL App (1st) 132696 (Ill. App. Ct. 2014). “230 ILCS 10/17.1(b) (West 2012). 1 In administrative review cases, we review the decision of the administrative agency, not the determination of the circuit court.”
J&J Ventures Gaming, LLC v. Wild, Inc., 2015 IL App (5th) 140092 (Ill. App. Ct. 2015). “" 230 ILCS 10/17.1(a) (West 2012). "Judicial review of all other final orders of the Board shall be conducted in accordance with the Administrative Review Law.”
C.Capp's LLC v. Jaffe, 2014 IL App (1st) 132696 (Ill. App. Ct. 2014). “230 ILCS 10/17.1(b) (West 2012).1 In administrative review cases, we review the decision of the administrative agency, not the determination of the circuit court.”
Doxsie v. Illinois Gaming Bd., 2021 IL App (1st) 191875 (Ill. App. Ct. 2021). “230 ILCS 10/17.1(b) (West 2018). Section 3-110 of the Administrative Review Law provides that “[t]he findings and conclusions of the administrative agency on questions of fact shall be held to be prima facie true and correct.”
Doxsie v. Illinois Gaming Bd., 2021 IL App (1st) 191875 (Ill. App. Ct. 2021). “230 ILCS 10/17.1(b) (West 2018). Section 3-110 of the Administrative Review Law provides that “[t]he findings and conclusions of the administrative agency shall be held to be prima facie true and correct.”
Emerald Casino v. The Illinois Gaming Bd. (Ill. App. Ct. 2006). · cites it 2× “230 ILCS 10/17.1(a) (West 2004). It referred to its petition as "seeking administrative review of a final order of the Illinois Gaming Board.”
J&J Ventures Gaming, LLC v. Illinois Gaming Bd., 2024 IL App (5th) 230255 (Ill. App. Ct. 2024). “ANALYSIS ¶ 17 On appeal, the plaintiffs claim the Gaming Board’s decision to validate and enforce Accel’s “second-in-time” exclusive location agreements rather than J&J Ventures’ “first-in-time” agreements was reversible error.”
Arch-View Casino Cruises, Inc. v. Illinois Gaming Bd., 636 N.E.2d 42 (Ill. App. Ct. 1994). “1(a) of the Riverboat Gambling Act (Act) (230 ILCS 10/17.1(a) (West 1992)) and Supreme Court Rule 335 (134 Ill.”
— 230 ILCS 10/17.1(a) — 4 cases
Emerald Casino, Inc. v. Illinois Gaming Bd., 852 N.E.2d 512 (Ill. App. Ct. 2006). “230 ILCS 10/17.1(a) (West 2004). It referred to its petition as “seeking administrative review of a final order of the Illinois Gaming Board.”
J&J Ventures Gaming, LLC v. Wild, Inc., 2015 IL App (5th) 140092 (Ill. App. Ct. 2015). “" 230 ILCS 10/17.1(a) (West 2012). "Judicial review of all other final orders of the Board shall be conducted in accordance with the Administrative Review Law.”
Emerald Casino v. The Illinois Gaming Bd. (Ill. App. Ct. 2006). “230 ILCS 10/17.1(a) (West 2004). It referred to its petition as "seeking administrative review of a final order of the Illinois Gaming Board.”
Arch-View Casino Cruises, Inc. v. Illinois Gaming Bd., 636 N.E.2d 42 (Ill. App. Ct. 1994). “1(a) of the Riverboat Gambling Act (Act) (230 ILCS 10/17.1(a) (West 1992)) and Supreme Court Rule 335 (134 Ill.”
— 230 ILCS 10/17.1(b) — 6 cases
J&J Ventures Gaming, LLC v. Wild, Inc., 2015 IL App (5th) 140092 (Ill. App. Ct. 2015). “” 230 ILCS 10/17.1(b) (West 2012). ¶ 53 Read as a whole, this statutory scheme, which encompasses the provisions of the Riverboat Gambling Act, evidences the legislature’s explicit intent that the Gaming Board have exclusive power over the gaming industry in order to preserve…”
C.Capp's LLC v. Jaffe, 2014 IL App (1st) 132696 (Ill. App. Ct. 2014). “230 ILCS 10/17.1(b) (West 2012). 1 In administrative review cases, we review the decision of the administrative agency, not the determination of the circuit court.”
C.Capp's LLC v. Jaffe, 2014 IL App (1st) 132696 (Ill. App. Ct. 2014). “230 ILCS 10/17.1(b) (West 2012).1 In administrative review cases, we review the decision of the administrative agency, not the determination of the circuit court.”
Doxsie v. Illinois Gaming Bd., 2021 IL App (1st) 191875 (Ill. App. Ct. 2021). “230 ILCS 10/17.1(b) (West 2018). Section 3-110 of the Administrative Review Law provides that “[t]he findings and conclusions of the administrative agency on questions of fact shall be held to be prima facie true and correct.”
Doxsie v. Illinois Gaming Bd., 2021 IL App (1st) 191875 (Ill. App. Ct. 2021). “230 ILCS 10/17.1(b) (West 2018). Section 3-110 of the Administrative Review Law provides that “[t]he findings and conclusions of the administrative agency shall be held to be prima facie true and correct.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.