ILCS » Chapter 720 · Act 5
Illinois Compiled Statutes

720 ILCS 5/33E-18 (2026)

Unlawful stringing of bids

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IL-ILGAilga.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(720 ILCS 5/33E-18)
    Sec. 33E-18. Unlawful stringing of bids.
    (a) A person commits unlawful stringing of bids when he or she, with the intent to evade the bidding requirements of any unit of local government or school district, knowingly strings or assists in stringing or attempts to string any contract or job order with the unit of local government or school district.
    (b) Sentence. Unlawful stringing of bids is a Class 4 felony.
(Source: P.A. 97-1108, eff. 1-1-13; 98-756, eff. 7-16-14.)


 
    (720 ILCS 5/Art. 33F heading)
ARTICLE 33F. UNLAWFUL USE OF BODY ARMOR

    
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 2016–2017 · leading case: People v. Oglesby, 2016 IL App (1st) 141477 (Ill. App. Ct. 2017).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
People v. Oglesby, 2016 IL App (1st) 141477 (Ill. App. Ct. 2017). “720 ILCS 5/33E-18(a) (West 2010). “ ‘Stringing’ means knowingly structuring a contract or job order to avoid the contract or job order being subject to competitive bidding requirements.”
People v. Oglesby, 2016 IL App (1st) 141477 (Ill. App. Ct. 2016). “720 ILCS 5/33E-18(a) (West 2010). “ ‘Stringing’ means knowingly structuring a contract or job order to avoid the contract or job order being subject to competitive bidding requirements.”
— 720 ILCS 5/33E-18(a) — 2 cases
People v. Oglesby, 2016 IL App (1st) 141477 (Ill. App. Ct. 2017). “720 ILCS 5/33E-18(a) (West 2010). “ ‘Stringing’ means knowingly structuring a contract or job order to avoid the contract or job order being subject to competitive bidding requirements.”
People v. Oglesby, 2016 IL App (1st) 141477 (Ill. App. Ct. 2016). “720 ILCS 5/33E-18(a) (West 2010). “ ‘Stringing’ means knowingly structuring a contract or job order to avoid the contract or job order being subject to competitive bidding requirements.”
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.