ILCS » Chapter 415 · Act 5
Illinois Compiled Statutes

415 ILCS 5/45 (2026)

Injunctive and other relief

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IL-ILGAilga.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(415 ILCS 5/45) (from Ch. 111 1/2, par. 1045)
    Sec. 45. Injunctive and other relief.
    (a) No existing civil or criminal remedy for any wrongful action shall be excluded or impaired by this Act. Nothing in this Act shall be construed to limit or supersede the provisions of the Illinois Oil and Gas Act and the powers therein granted to prevent the intrusion of water into oil, gas or coal strata and to prevent the pollution of fresh water supplies by oil, gas or salt water or oil field wastes, except that water quality standards as set forth by the Pollution Control Board apply to and are effective within the areas covered by and affected by permits issued by the Department of Natural Resources. However, if the Department of Natural Resources fails to act upon any complaint within a period of 10 working days following the receipt of a complaint by the Department, the Environmental Protection Agency may proceed under the provisions of this Act.
    (b) Any person adversely affected in fact by a violation of this Act, any rule or regulation adopted under this Act, any permit or term or condition of a permit, or any Board order may sue for injunctive relief against such violation. However, except as provided in subsections (d) and (e), no action shall be brought under this Section until 30 days after the plaintiff has been denied relief by the Board in a proceeding brought under subdivision (d)(1) of Section 31 of this Act. The prevailing party shall be awarded costs and reasonable attorneys' fees.
    (c) Nothing in Section 39.4 of this Act shall limit the authority of the Agency to proceed with enforcement under the provisions of this Act for violations of terms and conditions of an endorsed agrichemical facility permit, an endorsed lawncare containment permit, or this Act or regulations hereunder caused or threatened by an agrichemical facility or a lawncare wash water containment area, provided that prior notice is given to the Department of Agriculture which provides that Department an opportunity to respond as appropriate.
    (d) If the State brings an action under this Act against a person with an interest in real property upon which the person is alleged to have allowed open dumping or open burning by a third party in violation of this Act, which action seeks to compel the defendant to remove the waste or otherwise clean up the site, the defendant may, in the manner provided by law for third-party complaints, bring in as a third-party defendant a person who with actual knowledge caused or contributed to the illegal open dumping or open burning, or who is or may be liable for all or part of the removal and cleanup costs. The court may include any of the parties which it determines to have, with actual knowledge, allowed, caused or contributed to the illegal open dumping or open burning in any order that it may issue to compel removal of the waste and cleanup of the site, and may apportion the removal and cleanup costs among such parties, as it deems appropriate. However, a person may not seek to recover any fines or civil penalties imposed upon him under this Act from a third-party defendant in an action brought under this subsection.
    (e) A final order issued by the Board pursuant to Section 33 of this Act may be enforced through a civil action for injunctive or other relief instituted by a person who was a party to the Board enforcement proceeding in which the Board issued the final order.
(Source: P.A. 92-574, eff. 6-26-02; 93-152, eff. 7-10-03.)


 
    (415 ILCS 5/Tit. XIII heading)
TITLE XIII: MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS

    
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 13 cases, 1993–2016 · leading case: Donaldson v. Cent. Illinois Pub. Serv. Co., 767 N.E.2d 314 (Ill. 2002).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Donaldson v. Cent. Illinois Pub. Serv. Co., 767 N.E.2d 314 (Ill. 2002). · cites it 2× “CIPS warns that if this court permits liability here, it will slow down or reduce future clean-up efforts. *338 First, we reject CIPS's argument based upon the language of the Illinois Environmental Protection Act.”
People Ex Rel. Madigan v. Excavating & Lowboy Servs., Inc., 902 N.E.2d 1218 (Ill. App. Ct. 2009). · cites it 5× “415 ILCS 5/45 (West 2004). Specifically, subsection (a) of section 45 provides, in part, that “No existing civil or criminal remedy for any wrongful action shall be excluded or impaired by this Act.”
People Ex Rel. Ryan v. McFalls, 728 N.E.2d 1152 (Ill. App. Ct. 2000). · cites it 6× “We do not find it absurd or unreasonable that the legislature would choose to omit a knowledge requirement where the State is seeking to promote the public safety and welfare, but require a defendant/third-party plaintiff to prove actual knowledge where it is merely seeking to…”
City of Elgin v. Cnty. of Cook, 660 N.E.2d 875 (Ill. 1995). · cites it 2× “) Moreover, to protect against inaction by the Pollution Control Board or the Agency, the legislative scheme permits State's Attorneys and the Attorney General to file civil actions, authorizing them to seek injunctive relief where necessary.”
People Ex Rel. Ryan v. Agpro, Inc., 824 N.E.2d 270 (Ill. 2005). “” 415 ILCS 5/45(d) (West 2002). Section 58.”
E.O.R. Energy, LLC v. Pollution Control Bd., 2015 IL App (4th) 130443 (Ill. App. Ct. 2015). · cites it 2× “¶ 89 We note that the companies' jurisdictional argument relies heavily upon section 45(a) of the Environmental Act (415 ILCS 5/45(a) (West 2004)), which provides, in pertinent part, as follows: "Nothing in this Act shall be construed to limit or supersede the provisions of the…”
E.O.R. Energy, LLC v. Pollution Control Bd., 2015 IL App (4th) 130443 (Ill. App. Ct. 2015). · cites it 2× “¶ 89 We note that the companies’ jurisdictional argument relies heavily upon section 45(a) of the Environmental Act (415 ILCS 5/45(a) (West 2004)), which provides, in pertinent part, as follows: “Nothing in this Act shall be construed to limit or supersede the provisions of the…”
People ex rel. Madigan v. Lincoln, Ltd., 2016 IL App (1st) 143487 (Ill. App. Ct. 2016). “Section 45(d) of the Act (415 ILCS 5/45(d) (West 2010)) provides: “If the State brings an action under this Act against a person with an interest in real property upon which the person is alleged to have allowed open dumping or open burning by a third party in violation of this…”
Decatur Auto Auction, Inc. v. Macon Cnty. Farm Bureau, Inc., 627 N.E.2d 1129 (Ill. App. Ct. 1993). · cites it 2× “) Subsection (d) of section 45 of the Act is not applicable here.”
Vill. of Rockton v. Sonoco Prods. Co., 135 F. Supp. 3d 700 (N.D. Ill. 2015). “See 415 ILCS 5/45(a) (providing, in part, that "[n]o existing civil or criminal remedy for any wrongful action shall be excluded or impaired by this Act”).”
People ex rel. Ryan v. McFalls (Ill. App. Ct. 2000). · cites it 3× “s construction on the following propositions: (1) other subsections of section 21 that employ the phrase “cause or allow” only apply to owners or operators, while subsections that do not use the phrase apply to any person undertaking the prohibited act; (2) the construction is…”
Donaldson v. Cent. Illinois Pub. Serv. Co. (Ill. 2002). “Section 45(a) of the Illinois Environmental Protection Act (415 ILCS 5/45(a) (West 2000)) states that “[n]o existing civil or criminal remedy for any wrongful action shall be excluded or impaired by this Act.”
Show all 13 citing cases →
— 415 ILCS 5/45(a) — 7 cases
Donaldson v. Cent. Illinois Pub. Serv. Co., 767 N.E.2d 314 (Ill. 2002). “CIPS warns that if this court permits liability here, it will slow down or reduce future clean-up efforts. *338 First, we reject CIPS's argument based upon the language of the Illinois Environmental Protection Act.”
E.O.R. Energy, LLC v. Pollution Control Bd., 2015 IL App (4th) 130443 (Ill. App. Ct. 2015). “¶ 89 We note that the companies' jurisdictional argument relies heavily upon section 45(a) of the Environmental Act (415 ILCS 5/45(a) (West 2004)), which provides, in pertinent part, as follows: "Nothing in this Act shall be construed to limit or supersede the provisions of the…”
People Ex Rel. Madigan v. Excavating & Lowboy Servs., Inc., 902 N.E.2d 1218 (Ill. App. Ct. 2009). “415 ILCS 5/45 (West 2004). Specifically, subsection (a) of section 45 provides, in part, that “No existing civil or criminal remedy for any wrongful action shall be excluded or impaired by this Act.”
E.O.R. Energy, LLC v. Pollution Control Bd., 2015 IL App (4th) 130443 (Ill. App. Ct. 2015). “¶ 89 We note that the companies’ jurisdictional argument relies heavily upon section 45(a) of the Environmental Act (415 ILCS 5/45(a) (West 2004)), which provides, in pertinent part, as follows: “Nothing in this Act shall be construed to limit or supersede the provisions of the…”
Decatur Auto Auction, Inc. v. Macon Cnty. Farm Bureau, Inc., 627 N.E.2d 1129 (Ill. App. Ct. 1993). “) Subsection (d) of section 45 of the Act is not applicable here.”
— 415 ILCS 5/45(b) — 3 cases
City of Elgin v. Cnty. of Cook, 660 N.E.2d 875 (Ill. 1995). “) Moreover, to protect against inaction by the Pollution Control Board or the Agency, the legislative scheme permits State's Attorneys and the Attorney General to file civil actions, authorizing them to seek injunctive relief where necessary.”
People Ex Rel. Madigan v. Excavating & Lowboy Servs., Inc., 902 N.E.2d 1218 (Ill. App. Ct. 2009). “415 ILCS 5/45 (West 2004). Specifically, subsection (a) of section 45 provides, in part, that “No existing civil or criminal remedy for any wrongful action shall be excluded or impaired by this Act.”
Decatur Auto Auction, Inc. v. Macon Cnty. Farm Bureau, Inc., 627 N.E.2d 1129 (Ill. App. Ct. 1993). “) Subsection (d) of section 45 of the Act is not applicable here.”
— 415 ILCS 5/45(d) — 6 cases
People Ex Rel. Ryan v. McFalls, 728 N.E.2d 1152 (Ill. App. Ct. 2000). “We do not find it absurd or unreasonable that the legislature would choose to omit a knowledge requirement where the State is seeking to promote the public safety and welfare, but require a defendant/third-party plaintiff to prove actual knowledge where it is merely seeking to…”
People Ex Rel. Ryan v. Agpro, Inc., 824 N.E.2d 270 (Ill. 2005). “” 415 ILCS 5/45(d) (West 2002). Section 58.”
People Ex Rel. Madigan v. Excavating & Lowboy Servs., Inc., 902 N.E.2d 1218 (Ill. App. Ct. 2009). “415 ILCS 5/45 (West 2004). Specifically, subsection (a) of section 45 provides, in part, that “No existing civil or criminal remedy for any wrongful action shall be excluded or impaired by this Act.”
People ex rel. Madigan v. Lincoln, Ltd., 2016 IL App (1st) 143487 (Ill. App. Ct. 2016). “Section 45(d) of the Act (415 ILCS 5/45(d) (West 2010)) provides: “If the State brings an action under this Act against a person with an interest in real property upon which the person is alleged to have allowed open dumping or open burning by a third party in violation of this…”
People ex rel. Ryan v. McFalls (Ill. App. Ct. 2000). “s construction on the following propositions: (1) other subsections of section 21 that employ the phrase “cause or allow” only apply to owners or operators, while subsections that do not use the phrase apply to any person undertaking the prohibited act; (2) the construction is…”
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.