ILCS » Chapter 735 · Act 5
Illinois Compiled Statutes

735 ILCS 5/13-202.1 (2026)

No limitations on certain actions - Duties of Department of Corrections and State's Attorneys

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IL-ILGAilga.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(735 ILCS 5/13-202.1) (from Ch. 110, par. 13-202.1)
    Sec. 13-202.1. No limitations on certain actions - Duties of Department of Corrections and State's Attorneys.
    (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any action for damages against a person, however the action may be designated, may be brought at any time if --
        (1) the action is based upon conduct of a person
    
which constituted the commission of first degree murder, a Class X felony, or a Class 1 felony as these terms are utilized at the time of filing of the action; and
        (2) the person was convicted of the first degree
    
murder, Class X felony, or Class 1 felony.
    (b) The provisions of this Section are fully applicable to convictions based upon defendant's accountability under Section 5-2 of the Criminal Code of 1961 or the Criminal Code of 2012.
    (c) Paragraphs (a) and (b) above shall apply to any cause of action regardless of the date on which the defendant's conduct is alleged to have occurred or of the date of any conviction resulting therefrom. In addition, this Section shall be applied retroactively and shall revive causes of actions which otherwise may have been barred under limitations provisions in effect prior to the enactment and/or effect of P.A. 84-1450.
    (d) Whenever there is any settlement, verdict or judgment in excess of $500 in any court against the Department of Corrections or any past or present employee or official in favor of any person for damages incurred while the person was committed to the Department of Corrections, the Department within 14 days of the settlement, verdict or judgment shall notify the State's Attorney of the county from which the person was committed to the Department. The State's Attorney shall in turn within 14 days after receipt of the notice send the same notice to the person or persons who were the victim or victims of the crime for which the offender was committed, at their last known address, along with the information that the victim or victims should contact a private attorney to advise them of their rights under the law.
    (e) Whenever there is any settlement, verdict or judgment in excess of $500 in any court against any county or county sheriff or any past or present employee or official in favor of any person for damages incurred while the person was incarcerated in any county jail, the county or county sheriff, within 14 days of the settlement, verdict or judgment shall notify the State's Attorney of the county from which the person was incarcerated in the county jail. The State's Attorney shall within 14 days of receipt of the notice send the same notice to the person or persons who were the victim or victims of the crime for which the offender was committed, at their last known address, along with the information that the victim or victims should contact a private attorney to advise them of their rights under the law.
    (f) No civil action may be brought by anyone against the Department of Corrections, a State's Attorney, a County, a county sheriff, or any past or present employee or agent thereof for any alleged violation by any such entity or person of the notification requirements imposed by paragraph (d) or (e).
(Source: P.A. 97-1150, eff. 1-25-13.)

    
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11 cases, 1994–2019 · leading case: Sepmeyer v. Holman, 642 N.E.2d 1242 (Ill. 1994).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Sepmeyer v. Holman, 642 N.E.2d 1242 (Ill. 1994). · cites it 4× “(735 ILCS 5/13-202.1 (West 1992).) The statute became effective January 4, 1984.”
People v. Malchow, 739 N.E.2d 433 (Ill. 2000). “See 735 ILCS 5/13-202.1(d) (West 1996). The amendment to the Civil Administrative Code made a technical change to bring it into compliance with the name change of the Habitual Child Sex Offender Registration Act to the Sex Offender Registration Act.”
Blacke v. Indus. Comm'n, 644 N.E.2d 23 (Ill. App. Ct. 1994). “(See 735 ILCS 5/13-202.1 (West 1992).) We conclude that a limitation period is applicable to bringing a cause of action pursuant to section 19(g) of the Act.”
Gillespie Cmty. Unit Sch. Dist. No. 7 v. Wight & Co., 2014 IL 115330 (Ill. 2014). “) 735 ILCS 5/13-202.1(a) (West 2010). ¶ 40 Here, in contrast, section 13-214(e) does not state that a fraud-based construction claim may be brought at any time.”
Gillespie Cmty. Unit Sch. Dist. No. 7 v. Wight & Co., 2014 IL 115330 (Ill. 2014). “) 735 ILCS 5/13-202.1(a) (West 2010). ¶ 42 Here, in contrast, section 13-214(e) does not state that a fraud-based construction claim may be brought at any time.”
Meh v. Lh, 669 N.E.2d 1228 (Ill. App. Ct. 1996). “, 735 ILCS 5/13-202.1(c) (West 1992) ("this Section shall be applied retroactively and shall revive causes of actions which otherwise may have been barred under limitations provisions in effect prior to the enactment and/or effect of [the act]"); Sepmeyer v.”
Hampton v. Rita, 545 F. App'x 533 (7th Cir. 2013). “The district court acknowledged that Illinois permits victims of Class 1 felonies to sue for damages at any time if the perpetrator is convicted, 735 ILCS 5/13-202.1, and also provides a 20-year statute of limitations for personal-injury actions alleging sexual abuse committed…”
Appel v. LaSalle Cnty. State's Attorney Felony Enf't Unit (N.D. Ill. 2019). · cites it 3× “2013) (citing 735 ILCS 5/13-202.1). This argument fails in numerous respects.”
Gillespie Cmty. Unit Sch. Dist. No. 7 v. Wight & Co., 2014 IL 115330 (Ill. 2014). “) 735 ILCS 5/13-202.1(a) (West 2010). ¶ 41 Here, in contrast, section 13-214(e) does not state that a fraud-based construction claim may be brought at any time.”
Wheaton v. Suwana - Corrected Opinion (Ill. App. Ct. 2005). “" 735 ILCS 5/13-202.1(c) (West 1992). The Illinois Supreme Court reversed, citing its "established line of cases that have found a defense based on the expiration of the statute of limitation to be a 'vested right' protected by the Illinois Constitution and beyond legislative…”
People v. Whitney (Ill. App. Ct. 1998). “ranges for first degree murder, Class X felonies, and Class 1 felonies); 730 ILCS 5/5-8-2 (West 1996) (extended term sentencing ranges differ for first degree murder, Class X felonies, and Class 1 felonies); 730 ILCS 5/5-7-1 (West 1996) (authorizing periodic imprisonment where a…”
735 ILCS 5/13-202.1(a): 5 cases
Sepmeyer v. Holman, 642 N.E.2d 1242 (Ill. 1994). “(735 ILCS 5/13-202.1 (West 1992).) The statute became effective January 4, 1984.”
Gillespie Cmty. Unit Sch. Dist. No. 7 v. Wight & Co., 2014 IL 115330 (Ill. 2014). “) 735 ILCS 5/13-202.1(a) (West 2010). ¶ 40 Here, in contrast, section 13-214(e) does not state that a fraud-based construction claim may be brought at any time.”
Gillespie Cmty. Unit Sch. Dist. No. 7 v. Wight & Co., 2014 IL 115330 (Ill. 2014). “) 735 ILCS 5/13-202.1(a) (West 2010). ¶ 42 Here, in contrast, section 13-214(e) does not state that a fraud-based construction claim may be brought at any time.”
Appel v. LaSalle Cnty. State's Attorney Felony Enf't Unit (N.D. Ill. 2019). “2013) (citing 735 ILCS 5/13-202.1). This argument fails in numerous respects.”
Gillespie Cmty. Unit Sch. Dist. No. 7 v. Wight & Co., 2014 IL 115330 (Ill. 2014). “) 735 ILCS 5/13-202.1(a) (West 2010). ¶ 41 Here, in contrast, section 13-214(e) does not state that a fraud-based construction claim may be brought at any time.”
735 ILCS 5/13-202.1(c): 3 cases
Sepmeyer v. Holman, 642 N.E.2d 1242 (Ill. 1994). “(735 ILCS 5/13-202.1 (West 1992).) The statute became effective January 4, 1984.”
Meh v. Lh, 669 N.E.2d 1228 (Ill. App. Ct. 1996). “, 735 ILCS 5/13-202.1(c) (West 1992) ("this Section shall be applied retroactively and shall revive causes of actions which otherwise may have been barred under limitations provisions in effect prior to the enactment and/or effect of [the act]"); Sepmeyer v.”
Wheaton v. Suwana - Corrected Opinion (Ill. App. Ct. 2005). “" 735 ILCS 5/13-202.1(c) (West 1992). The Illinois Supreme Court reversed, citing its "established line of cases that have found a defense based on the expiration of the statute of limitation to be a 'vested right' protected by the Illinois Constitution and beyond legislative…”
735 ILCS 5/13-202.1(d): 2 cases
People v. Malchow, 739 N.E.2d 433 (Ill. 2000). “See 735 ILCS 5/13-202.1(d) (West 1996). The amendment to the Civil Administrative Code made a technical change to bring it into compliance with the name change of the Habitual Child Sex Offender Registration Act to the Sex Offender Registration Act.”
Sepmeyer v. Holman, 642 N.E.2d 1242 (Ill. 1994). “(735 ILCS 5/13-202.1 (West 1992).) The statute became effective January 4, 1984.”
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.