Illinois Compiled Statutes

230 ILCS 20/6 (2026)

Each licensee must keep a complete record of pull tabs and jar games conducted within the previous 3 years

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IL-ILGAilga.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(230 ILCS 20/6) (from Ch. 120, par. 1056)
    Sec. 6. Each licensee must keep a complete record of pull tabs and jar games conducted within the previous 3 years. Such record shall be available for inspection by any employee of the Department of Revenue during reasonable business hours. The Department may require that any person, organization, or corporation licensed under this Act obtain from an Illinois certified public accounting firm at its own expense a certified and unqualified financial statement and verification of records of such organization. Failure of a pull tabs and jar games licensee to comply with this requirement within 90 days of receiving notice from the Department may result in suspension or revocation of the licensee's license.
    The Department of Revenue may, at its discretion, suspend or revoke any license if it finds that the licensee or any person connected therewith has violated or is violating this Act. A suspension or revocation shall be in addition to, and not in lieu of, any other civil penalties or assessments that are authorized by this Act. No licensee under this Act, while pull tabs and jar games chances are being conducted, shall knowingly permit entry to any part of the licensed premises by any person who has been convicted of a felony or a violation of Article 28 of the Criminal Code of 1961 or the Criminal Code of 2012.
(Source: P.A. 97-1150, eff. 1-25-13.)

    
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1 case, 1995–1995 · leading case: Cie v. Comdata Network, Inc., 656 N.E.2d 123 (Ill. App. Ct. 1995).
Cie v. Comdata Network, Inc., 656 N.E.2d 123 (Ill. App. Ct. 1995). “1056 (now 230 ILCS 20/6 (West 1994))), and section 7(2) of the Riverboat Gambling Act (Ill.”
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.