ILCS » Chapter 25 · Act 170
Illinois Compiled Statutes

25 ILCS 170/8 (2026)

Contingent fees prohibited

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IL-ILGAilga.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(25 ILCS 170/8) (from Ch. 63, par. 178)
    Sec. 8. Contingent fees prohibited. No person shall retain or employ another to lobby or provide services as a consultant with respect to any legislative, executive, or administrative action for compensation contingent in whole or in part upon the outcome of the action and no person shall accept any such employment or render any such service for compensation contingent upon the outcome of the legislative, executive, or administrative action.
(Source: P.A. 102-664, eff. 1-1-22.)

    
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1995–2021 · leading case: Kane v. Option Care Enter., Inc., 2021 IL App (1st) 200666 (Ill. App. Ct. 2021).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Kane v. Option Care Enter., Inc., 2021 IL App (1st) 200666 (Ill. App. Ct. 2021). · cites it 6× “” The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of Option Care after finding that the agreement between Kane and Option Care was unenforceable as a matter of public policy because it provided for contingency fee lobbying in violation of section 8 of the Lobbyist Registration…”
Seiden Law Grp., P.C. v. Segal, 2021 IL App (1st) 200877 (Ill. App. Ct. 2021). “3 In that case, this court affirmed the circuit court’s finding that a contingency-fee contract between a company and an attorney-lobbyist was unenforceable as a matter of public policy because the agreement violated section 8 of the Lobbyist Registration Act (25 ILCS 170/8…”
Rome v. Upton, 648 N.E.2d 1085 (Ill. App. Ct. 1995). “No person shall retain or employ another to promote or oppose legislation for compensation contingent in whole or in part upon the passage or defeat of any legislation, or the approval or veto of any legislation by the Governor, and no person shall accept any such employment or…”
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.