Illinois Compiled Statutes
705 ILCS 405/1-15 (2026)
Wrong Venue or Inadequate Service
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
IL-ILGAilga.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
(705 ILCS 405/1-15)
(from Ch. 37, par. 801-15)
Sec. 1-15.
Wrong Venue or Inadequate Service.
(a) All objections of
improper venue are waived by a party respondent unless a motion to transfer
to a proper venue is made by that party respondent before the start of an
adjudicatory hearing conducted under any Article of this Act. No order or
judgment is void because of a claim that it was rendered in the wrong venue
unless that claim is raised in accordance with this Section.
(b) A party respondent who either has been properly served, or who
appears before the court personally or by counsel at the adjudicatory
hearing or at any earlier proceeding on a petition for wardship under this
Act leading to that adjudicatory hearing, and who wishes to object to the
court's jurisdiction on the ground that some necessary party either has not
been served or has not been properly served must raise that claim before
the start of the adjudicatory hearing conducted under any Article of this
Act. No order or judgment is void because of a claim of inadequate service
unless that claim is raised in accordance with this Section.
(Source: P.A. 86-1012; 86-1475.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3
cases, 2001–2009 · leading case: People Ex Rel. Devine v. Sharkey, 852 N.E.2d 804 (Ill. 2006).
People Ex Rel. Devine v. Sharkey, 852 N.E.2d 804 (Ill. 2006). “" Section 1-5 of the Act (705 ILCS 405/1-5 (West 2004)), governing rights of parties to proceedings, refers to "the minor who is the subject of the proceeding and his parents, guardian, legal custodian or responsible relative who are parties respondent.”
In Re Kc, 753 N.E.2d 314 (Ill. App. Ct. 2001). “Schlee from service (predicated on the previous appointment of Kenya's plenary guardian) prior to commencing the termination hearing, we need not reach the question of the validity of such concurrent appointments.”
In Re Mw, 905 N.E.2d 757 (Ill. 2009). “801-15(b), now 705 ILCS 405/1-15(b) (West 1994)) was unconstitutional.”
— 705 ILCS 405/1-15(b) — 2 cases
In Re Kc, 753 N.E.2d 314 (Ill. App. Ct. 2001). “Schlee from service (predicated on the previous appointment of Kenya's plenary guardian) prior to commencing the termination hearing, we need not reach the question of the validity of such concurrent appointments.”
In Re Mw, 905 N.E.2d 757 (Ill. 2009). “801-15(b), now 705 ILCS 405/1-15(b) (West 1994)) was unconstitutional.”
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.
|