ILCS » Chapter 735 · Act 5
Illinois Compiled Statutes

735 ILCS 5/13-207 (2026)

Counterclaim or set-off

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IL-ILGAilga.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(735 ILCS 5/13-207) (from Ch. 110, par. 13-207)
    Sec. 13-207. Counterclaim or set-off. A defendant may plead a set-off or counterclaim barred by the statute of limitation or the statute of repose, while held and owned by him or her, to any action, the cause of which was owned by the plaintiff or person under whom he or she claims, before such set-off or counterclaim was so barred, and not otherwise. This section shall not affect the right of a bona fide assignee of a negotiable instrument assigned before due. The changes made to this Section by this amendatory Act of the 102nd General Assembly apply to claims initiated on or after the effective date of this amendatory Act of the 102nd General Assembly and to claims intentionally filed to preclude a defendant a reasonable opportunity to file a counterclaim within the original limitation period.
(Source: P.A. 102-908, eff. 5-27-22.)

    
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 41 cases (9 in the last 5 years), 1993–2025 · leading case: U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass'n v. Manzo, 2011 IL App (1st) 103115 (Ill. App. Ct. 2011).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass'n v. Manzo, 2011 IL App (1st) 103115 (Ill. App. Ct. 2011). · cites it 9× “§ 1635 (i)(3) (2006)) and section 13-207 of the Illinois Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/13-207 (West 2008)). In addition, the Manzos contend that in dismissing their counterclaim as untimely filed the circuit court should not have also dismissed their section 1640 claim for…”
Barragan v. Casco Design Corp., 837 N.E.2d 16 (Ill. 2005). · cites it 2× “The issue presented in this case is whether section 13-207 of the Code of Civil Procedure (Code) (735 ILCS 5/13-207 (West 2000)), which allows counterclaims to proceed even when otherwise barred by a statute of limitations, should have been applied to save Osman's responsive…”
In Re Est. of Parker, 957 N.E.2d 454 (Ill. App. Ct. 2011). · cites it 2× “¶ 2 On appeal, respondent seeks: (1) the reversal of the circuit court's order granting the heirs' motion to dismiss her counterclaim; (2) a finding that the circuit court erred as a matter of law when it ruled Code section 13-207 (735 ILCS 5/13-207 (West 2008)) prohibited…”
Us Bank Nat. Ass'n v. Manzo, 960 N.E.2d 1238 (Ill. App. Ct. 2011). · cites it 10× “§ 1635 (i)(3) (2006)) and section 13-207 of the Illinois Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/13-207 (West 2008)). In addition, the Manzos contend that in dismissing their counterclaim as untimely filed the circuit court should not have also dismissed their section 1640 claim for…”
United Cent. Bank v. Wells Street Apts., LLC, 957 F. Supp. 2d 978 (E.D. Wis. 2013). · cites it 2× “UCB next argues that, even if it has already exhausted its two permitted filings under § 13-217, another Illinois statute, 735 ILCS 5/13-207, operates to save UCB’s claim for breach of the notes.”
Beneficial Illinois, Inc. v. Parker, 2016 IL App (1st) 160186 (Ill. App. Ct. 2017). · cites it 3× “; 735 ILCS 5/13-207 (West 2014). However, such a recoupment claim must meet the requirements of section 13-207.”
GreenPoint Mortg. Funding, Inc. v. Hirt, 2018 IL App (1st) 170921 (Ill. App. Ct. 2018). · cites it 2× “735 ILCS 5/13-207 (West 2014); Beneficial Illinois Inc.”
U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass'n v. Miller, 2020 IL App (1st) 191029 (Ill. App. Ct. 2020). “See 735 ILCS 5/13-207 (West 2016). Accordingly, U.”
Greenpoint Mortg. Funding, Inc. v. Cynthia Hirt, Mortg. Reg. Sys., Inc., 2018 IL App (1st) 170921 (Ill. App. Ct. 2018). · cites it 2× “735 ILCS 5/13-207 (West 2014) ; Beneficial Illinois Inc.”
Goldstein v. Kinney Shoe Corp., 931 F. Supp. 595 (N.D. Ill. 1996). · cites it 2× “Under 735 ILCS 5/13-207, however, “a defendant in a lawsuit may bring a counterclaim after the period authorized in the applicable statute of limitations has elapsed, as long as the plaintiffs claim arose before the cause of action brought as a counterclaim was barred.”
Dudek, Inc. v. Shred Pax Corp., 626 N.E.2d 1204 (Ill. App. Ct. 1993). “Although Shred Pax may be required to expend more fees in litigation, we do not agree that Dudek is sneaking its complaint through the backdoor or that the principles of equity and the utility of section 2 — 1401 will be injured under these facts and circumstances.”
O'Gorman v. City of Chicago, 958 F. Supp. 2d 928 (D. Ill. 2013). · cites it 3× “A provision of the Illinois Code of Civil Procedure, 735 ILCS 5/13-207, allows a defendant in an action to assert any counterclaims against a plaintiff, even if they are time-barred.”
Show all 41 citing cases →
— 735 ILCS 5/13-207(b)(2) — 1 case
Keller v. Walker (Ill. App. Ct. 2001).
— 735 ILCS 5/13-207(c) — 1 case
Relf v. Shatayeva, 2013 IL 114925 (Ill. 2013).
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.