Illinois Compiled Statutes
705 ILCS 205/1 (2026)
No person shall be permitted to practice as an attorney or counselor at law within this State without having previously obtained a license for that purpose from the Supreme Court of this State
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
IL-ILGAilga.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
(705 ILCS 205/1)
(from Ch. 13, par. 1)
Sec. 1. No person shall be permitted to practice as an attorney or
counselor at law within this State without having previously obtained a
license for that purpose from the Supreme Court of this State.
No person shall receive any compensation directly or indirectly for any
legal services other than a regularly licensed attorney, nor may an unlicensed person advertise or hold himself or herself out to provide legal services.
A license, as provided for herein, constitutes the person receiving the
same an attorney and counselor at law, according to the law and customs
thereof, for and during his good behavior in the practice and authorizes
him to demand and receive fees for any services which he may render as an
attorney and counselor at law in this State.
No person shall be granted a license or renewal authorized by this Act who is
more than 30 days delinquent in complying with a child support order; a license
or renewal may be issued, however, if the person has
established a satisfactory repayment record as determined (i) by the Department of Healthcare and Family Services (formerly Illinois
Department of Public Aid) for cases being enforced under Article X of the
Illinois Public Aid Code or (ii) in all other cases by order of court or by
written agreement between the custodial parent and non-custodial parent.
No person shall be refused a license under this Act on account of sex.
Any person practicing, charging or receiving fees for legal services
or advertising or holding himself or herself out to provide legal services within this State, either directly or indirectly, without being licensed to
practice as herein required, is guilty of contempt of court and shall be
punished accordingly, upon complaint being filed in any Circuit Court of
this State. The remedies available include, but are not limited to: (i) appropriate equitable relief; (ii) a civil penalty not to exceed $5,000, which shall be paid to the Illinois Equal Justice Foundation; and (iii) actual damages. Such proceedings shall be conducted in the Courts of the
respective counties where the alleged contempt has been committed in the
same manner as in cases of indirect contempt and with the right of review
by the parties thereto.
The provisions of this Act shall be in addition to other remedies
permitted by law and shall not be construed to deprive courts of this State
of their inherent right to punish for contempt or to restrain the
unauthorized practice of law.
Nothing in this Act shall be construed to conflict with, amend, or modify Section 5 of the Corporation Practice of Law Prohibition Act or prohibit representation of a
party by a person who is not an attorney in a proceeding before either panel
of the Illinois Labor Relations Board under the Illinois Public Labor Relations Act, as now or
hereafter amended, the Illinois Educational Labor Relations Board under the
Illinois Educational Labor Relations Act, as now or hereafter amended, the
State Civil Service Commission, the local Civil Service Commissions, or the
University Civil Service Merit Board, to the extent allowed pursuant to
rules and regulations promulgated by those Boards and Commissions or the giving of information, training, or advocacy or assistance in any meetings or administrative proceedings held pursuant to the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, the federal Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the federal Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, or the federal Social Security Act, to the extent allowed by those laws or the federal regulations or State statutes implementing those laws.
(Source: P.A. 100-872, eff. 8-14-18.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 44
cases (12 in the last 5 years), 1995–2026 · leading case: King v. First Capital Fin. Servs. Corp., 828 N.E.2d 1155 (Ill. 2005).
King v. First Capital Fin. Servs. Corp., 828 N.E.2d 1155 (Ill. 2005). “Finally, plaintiffs rely on section 1 of the Attorney Act (705 ILCS 205/1 (West 2002)) as decisive proof that the receipt of a fee for services that would otherwise come within the pro se exception turns such conduct into the unauthorized practice of law.”
Sudzus v. Dep't of Emp. Sec., 914 N.E.2d 208 (Ill. App. Ct. 2009). “Thus, section 806 of the Act provides that “[a]ny individual or entity in any proceeding before the Director or his representative, or the Referee or the Board of Review, may be represented by a union or any duly authorized agent.”
Applebaum v. Rush Univ. Med. Ctr., 877 N.E.2d 80 (Ill. App. Ct. 2007). “705 ILCS 205/1 (West 2004). With this background, we agree with defendants that Sperry is distinguishable from this case.”
Ratcliffe v. Apantaku, 742 N.E.2d 843 (Ill. App. Ct. 2000). “1 (now 705 ILCS 205/1 (West 1998))), “One not duly authorized to practice law may not represent another in a court of law.”
Downtown Disposal Servs., Inc. v. City of Chicago, 943 N.E.2d 185 (Ill. App. Ct. 2011). “n this instance violated its due process and equal protection rights, the City contends that DD has forfeited this issue by failing to inform the Illinois Attorney General that DD was challenging the constitutionality of Illinois statutes, specifically, section 1 of the…”
In re Est. of Mattson, 2019 IL App (1st) 180805 (Ill. App. Ct. 2019). “For the reasons to follow, we strike his brief and dismiss the appeal.”
People v. Dunson, 737 N.E.2d 699 (Ill. App. Ct. 2000). “See 705 ILCS 205/1 (West 1998). The court cited the general rule that, where it appears that one not licensed to practice law has instituted legal proceedings on behalf of another in a court of record, such action should be dismissed, and if the action has proceeded to judgment,…”
Colmar Ltd. v. Fremantlemedia North Am., Inc., 801 N.E.2d 1017 (Ill. App. Ct. 2003). “” 705 ILCS 205/1 (West 2002). The general rule in Illinois provides that judgments that result from legal proceedings brought in a court of record on a party’s behalf by a person who is not licensed to practice law in this state are void.”
King v. First Capital Fin. Servs. Corp., 798 N.E.2d 118 (Ill. App. Ct. 2003). “*122 Nonetheless, I do not believe that the Kings have a remedy in Illinois law. Section 205/1 of the Attorney Act does not allow money damages for the unauthorized practice of law, but the statute does sanction "other remedies permitted by law.”
Edwards v. City of Henry, 924 N.E.2d 978 (Ill. App. Ct. 2008). “Additionally, the City’s motion alleged that Edwards, a nonlawyer, previously had been admonished by the court in related litigation for the unauthorized practice of law by attempting to represent the corporations, Corsaw and IRH, in violation of the Illinois Attorney Act (705…”
LVNV Funding v. Trice, 2011 IL App (1st) 92773 (Ill. App. Ct. 2011). “705 ILCS 205/1 (West 2008). Courts may similarly penalize anyone who acts as a collection agency without registering.”
In re Est. of Mattson, 2019 IL App (1st) 180805 (Ill. App. Ct. 2019). “705 ILCS 205/1 (West 2016); Ratcliffe, 318 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.
|