Illinois Compiled Statutes
735 ILCS 5/12-115 (2026)
Notice of sale of real estate
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
IL-ILGAilga.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
(735 ILCS 5/12-115)
(from Ch. 110, par. 12-115)
Sec. 12-115.
Notice of sale of real estate.
Except as to any sale had
by virtue of a judgment of foreclosure entered in accordance with Article
XV, no real estate shall be
sold by virtue of any judgment,
except at public sale, between the hours of 9
in the morning and
the setting of the sun of the same day, nor unless the time (specifying
the particular hour of day at which the sale shall commence) and the
place of holding such sale shall have been previously advertised 3
successive weeks, once in each week, in a newspaper published in the
county where the sale is made (if there is any newspaper published
in such county), and by placing written or printed notices thereof in
at least 3 of the most public places in the county where the real estate
is situated, specifying the name of the judgment creditor and judgment debtor
in the judgment in all of which notices the real estate to be sold shall be
described with reasonable certainty, and if there is more than one
newspaper published in such county, the judgment creditor or his or her
attorney may designate the newspaper in which such notice shall be published.
(Source: P.A. 84-1462.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3
cases, 2002–2019 · leading case: In Re Marriage of King, 802 N.E.2d 1216 (Ill. 2003).
In Re Marriage of King, 802 N.E.2d 1216 (Ill. 2003). “alleged irregularities in the sale, including that (1) the January 5, 1999, attorney fees order, pursuant to which the sale was made, limited collection of the judgment to certain of Samuel's accounts and did not authorize a levy on real estate; (2) the notice of the sale was…”
United States v. Hillcrest Resort, Inc. (C.D. Ill. 2019). “Moreover, Central National Bank involved a different statutory scheme, 735 ILCS 5/12-115–116, so it is not clear that it has any relevance to this mortgage foreclosure action, which is governed by the IMFL.”
In re Marriage of King (Ill. App. Ct. 2002). “ion to arguing that appellee was mentally and physically impaired, the public guardian also argued that the January 5 order required that the $4,380 judgment be satisfied from appellee's bank accounts instead of by means of placing a levy on his home; that the notice of levy was…”
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.
|