Illinois Compiled Statutes
735 ILCS 5/13-209 (2026)
Death of party
✓ laws through the 2026 session (checked Sept. 2026)
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
IL-ILGAilga.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
(735 ILCS 5/13-209)
(from Ch. 110, par. 13-209)
Sec. 13-209.
Death of party.
(a) If a person entitled to bring an
action dies before the
expiration of the time limited for the commencement thereof, and the
cause of action survives:
(1) an action may be commenced by his or her | representative before the expiration of that time, or within one year from his or her death whichever date is the later; |
(2) if no petition for letters of office for the | decedent's estate has been filed, the court may appoint a special representative for the deceased for the purpose of prosecuting the action. The appointment shall be on verified motion of any party who appears entitled to participate in the deceased's estate, reciting the names and last known addresses of all known heirs and the legatees and executor named in any will that has been filed. The court's determination that a person appears entitled to participate in the deceased's estate shall be solely for purposes of this Section and not determinative of rights in final disposition. Within 90 days after appointment, the special representative shall notify the heirs and legatees of the following information by mail: that an appointment has been made, the court in which the case was filed, the caption of the case, and a description of the nature of the case. The special representative shall publish notice to unknown heirs and legatees as provided in the Probate Act of 1975. If a will is filed within 90 days after the appointment of the special representative, the same notice shall be given to any additional executors and legatees named in the will. At any time that an estate is opened with a representative other than the special representative, the court may upon motion substitute the representative for the special representative. In this case, the court shall allow disbursements and fees of the special representative and his or her attorney as a claim against any proceeds received. The proceeds of any judgment or settlement shall be distributed under the provisions of the Probate Act of 1975. |
(b) If a person against whom an
action may be brought dies before the expiration of the time limited for
the commencement thereof, and the cause of action survives, and is not
otherwise barred:
(1) an action may be commenced against his or her | personal representative after the expiration of the time limited for the commencement of the action, and within 6 months after the person's death; |
(2) if no petition has been filed for letters of | office for the deceased's estate, the court, upon the motion of a person entitled to bring an action and after the notice to the party's heirs or legatees as the court directs and without opening an estate, may appoint a special representative for the deceased party for the purposes of defending the action. If a party elects to have a special representative appointed under this paragraph (2), the recovery shall be limited to the proceeds of any liability insurance protecting the estate and shall not bar the estate from enforcing any claims that might have been available to it as counterclaims. |
(c) If a party commences an action against a deceased person whose
death is unknown to the party before the expiration of the time limited for
the commencement thereof, and the cause of action survives, and is not
otherwise barred, the action may be commenced against the deceased person's
personal representative if all of the following terms and conditions are met:
(1) After learning of the death, the party proceeds | with reasonable diligence to move the court for leave to file an amended complaint, substituting the personal representative as defendant. |
(2) The party proceeds with reasonable diligence to | serve process upon the personal representative. |
(3) If process is served more than 6 months after the | issuance of letters of office, liability of the estate is limited as to recovery to the extent the estate is protected by liability insurance. |
(4) In no event can a party commence an action under | this subsection (c) unless a personal representative is appointed and an amended complaint is filed within 2 years of the time limited for the commencement of the original action. |
(Source: P.A. 90-111, eff. 7-14-97.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 48
cases (14 in the last 5 years), 1993–2024 · leading case: Relf v. Shatayeva, 2013 IL 114925, 998 N.E.2d 18.
Relf v. Shatayeva, 2013 IL 114925, 998 N.E.2d 18. “The circuit court found the “special administrator’s” motion to be meritorious and dismissed, rejecting plaintiff’s arguments that the action should be deemed timely under the provisions of section 13-209 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/13-209 (West 2010)) which…”
Relf v. Shatayeva, 2013 IL 114925. “The circuit court found the “special administrator’s” motion to be meritorious and dismissed, rejecting plaintiff’s arguments that the action should be deemed timely under the provisions of section 13-209 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/13-209 (West 2010)) which…”
Augustus v. Est. of Somers, 662 N.E.2d 138 (Ill. App. Ct. 4th Dist. 1996). “Under section 13-209(c) of the Code, when a party commences an action against a deceased person whose death is unknown, the action may be refiled against the deceased person's personal representative so long as the amended complaint is filed within two years of the expiration of…”
Relf v. Shatayeva, 2012 IL App (1st) 112071, 975 N.E.2d 1204. “735 ILCS 5/13-209 (West 2010). Subsection (a) provides for when “a person entitled to bring an action dies” and, therefore, does not apply to the case at bar because the plaintiff is still alive.”
Lichter v. Porter Carroll, 2023 IL 128468, 231 N.E.3d 147. “” 735 ILCS 5/13-209(b), (c) (West 2020). ¶ 11 Relying upon Relf v.”
Richards v. Vaca, 2021 IL App (2d) 210270, 196 N.E.3d 585. “The court then examined section 13-209 of the Code (735 ILCS 5/13-209 (West 2020)). It concluded that plaintiff was entitled to the appointment of a special representative despite the running of the limitations period.”
Zayed v. Clark Manor Convalescent Ctr., Inc., 2019 IL App (1st) 181552, 141 N.E.3d 767. “]” 735 ILCS 5/13-209 (West 2016). “§ 13-211.”
Ray v. Maher, 662 F.3d 770 (7th Cir. 2011). “735 ILCS 5/13-209(a)(l). Because the former administrator, Miller, was (and had to be) an adult, and because there is no allegation that the defendants have interfered with her ability to state a claim, the plaintiff has presented no justifiable reason to toll the limitations…”
Moon v. Rhode, 2016 IL 119572, 67 N.E.3d 220. “” 735 ILCS 5/13-209(a) (West 2012). ¶ 36 The parties only address the applicability of the discovery rule to plaintiff’s survival action briefly, both relying upon this court’s decision in Advincula v.”
Fosler v. Midwest Care Ctr. II, Inc., 928 N.E.2d 1 (Ill. App. Ct. 2d Dist. 2010). “See 735 ILCS 5/13-209(a) (West 2006); 755 ILCS 5/27-6 (West 2006).”
Deutsche Bank Nat'l Trust Co. v. Est. of Schoenberg, 2018 IL App (1st) 160871. “May 1, 2013), which provides that where a mortgagor is deceased and no estate has been opened, the circuit court “shall *** appoint a special representative to stand in the place of the deceased mortgagor(s) who shall act in a manner similar to that provided by section 13-209 of…”
Moon v. Rhode, 2016 IL 119572. “” 735 ILCS 5/13-209(a) (West 2012). ¶ 36 The parties only address the applicability of the discovery rule to plaintiff’s survival action briefly, both relying upon this court’s decision in Advincula v.”
735 ILCS 5/13-209(a): 9 cases
Relf v. Shatayeva, 2013 IL 114925. “The circuit court found the “special administrator’s” motion to be meritorious and dismissed, rejecting plaintiff’s arguments that the action should be deemed timely under the provisions of section 13-209 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/13-209 (West 2010)) which…”
Moon v. Rhode, 2016 IL 119572, 67 N.E.3d 220. “” 735 ILCS 5/13-209(a) (West 2012). ¶ 36 The parties only address the applicability of the discovery rule to plaintiff’s survival action briefly, both relying upon this court’s decision in Advincula v.”
Relf v. Shatayeva, 2013 IL 114925, 998 N.E.2d 18. “The circuit court found the “special administrator’s” motion to be meritorious and dismissed, rejecting plaintiff’s arguments that the action should be deemed timely under the provisions of section 13-209 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/13-209 (West 2010)) which…”
Fosler v. Midwest Care Ctr. II, Inc., 928 N.E.2d 1 (Ill. App. Ct. 2d Dist. 2010). “See 735 ILCS 5/13-209(a) (West 2006); 755 ILCS 5/27-6 (West 2006).”
Moon v. Rhode, 2016 IL 119572. “” 735 ILCS 5/13-209(a) (West 2012). ¶ 36 The parties only address the applicability of the discovery rule to plaintiff’s survival action briefly, both relying upon this court’s decision in Advincula v.”
735 ILCS 5/13-209(a)(1): 4 cases
Zayed v. Clark Manor Convalescent Ctr., Inc., 2019 IL App (1st) 181552, 141 N.E.3d 767. “]” 735 ILCS 5/13-209 (West 2016). “§ 13-211.”
Giles v. Parks, 2018 IL App (1st) 163152.
Giles v. Parks, 2018 IL App (1st) 163152, 97 N.E.3d 160.
Castello v. Kalis, No. 1-03-0840 Rel (Ill. App. Ct. 1st Dist. Sept. 14, 2004).
735 ILCS 5/13-209(a)(2): 4 cases
Relf v. Shatayeva, 2013 IL 114925. “The circuit court found the “special administrator’s” motion to be meritorious and dismissed, rejecting plaintiff’s arguments that the action should be deemed timely under the provisions of section 13-209 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/13-209 (West 2010)) which…”
Relf v. Shatayeva, 2013 IL 114925, 998 N.E.2d 18. “The circuit court found the “special administrator’s” motion to be meritorious and dismissed, rejecting plaintiff’s arguments that the action should be deemed timely under the provisions of section 13-209 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/13-209 (West 2010)) which…”
Bouloute v. Carrillo, 2024 IL App (1st) 220454-U.
Sopron v. Cassidy, No. 1:19-cv-08254 (N.D. Ill. June 28, 2022).
735 ILCS 5/13-209(a)(l): 1 case
Ray v. Maher, 662 F.3d 770 (7th Cir. 2011). “735 ILCS 5/13-209(a)(l). Because the former administrator, Miller, was (and had to be) an adult, and because there is no allegation that the defendants have interfered with her ability to state a claim, the plaintiff has presented no justifiable reason to toll the limitations…”
735 ILCS 5/13-209(b): 17 cases
Relf v. Shatayeva, 2012 IL App (1st) 112071, 975 N.E.2d 1204. “735 ILCS 5/13-209 (West 2010). Subsection (a) provides for when “a person entitled to bring an action dies” and, therefore, does not apply to the case at bar because the plaintiff is still alive.”
Relf v. Shatayeva, 2013 IL 114925, 998 N.E.2d 18. “The circuit court found the “special administrator’s” motion to be meritorious and dismissed, rejecting plaintiff’s arguments that the action should be deemed timely under the provisions of section 13-209 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/13-209 (West 2010)) which…”
Lichter v. Porter Carroll, 2023 IL 128468, 231 N.E.3d 147. “” 735 ILCS 5/13-209(b), (c) (West 2020). ¶ 11 Relying upon Relf v.”
In re Est. of Topal, 2022 IL App (4th) 210613.
Relf v. Shatayeva, 2013 IL 114925. “The circuit court found the “special administrator’s” motion to be meritorious and dismissed, rejecting plaintiff’s arguments that the action should be deemed timely under the provisions of section 13-209 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/13-209 (West 2010)) which…”
735 ILCS 5/13-209(b)(1): 5 cases
Relf v. Shatayeva, 2013 IL 114925. “The circuit court found the “special administrator’s” motion to be meritorious and dismissed, rejecting plaintiff’s arguments that the action should be deemed timely under the provisions of section 13-209 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/13-209 (West 2010)) which…”
Relf v. Shatayeva, 2013 IL 114925, 998 N.E.2d 18. “The circuit court found the “special administrator’s” motion to be meritorious and dismissed, rejecting plaintiff’s arguments that the action should be deemed timely under the provisions of section 13-209 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/13-209 (West 2010)) which…”
Lichter v. Porter Carroll, 2023 IL 128468, 231 N.E.3d 147. “” 735 ILCS 5/13-209(b), (c) (West 2020). ¶ 11 Relying upon Relf v.”
Richards v. Vaca, 2021 IL App (2d) 210270, 196 N.E.3d 585. “The court then examined section 13-209 of the Code (735 ILCS 5/13-209 (West 2020)). It concluded that plaintiff was entitled to the appointment of a special representative despite the running of the limitations period.”
Lichter v. Carroll, 2022 IL App (1st) 200828, 220 N.E.3d 1125.
735 ILCS 5/13-209(b)(2): 11 cases
Relf v. Shatayeva, 2013 IL 114925, 998 N.E.2d 18. “The circuit court found the “special administrator’s” motion to be meritorious and dismissed, rejecting plaintiff’s arguments that the action should be deemed timely under the provisions of section 13-209 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/13-209 (West 2010)) which…”
Richards v. Vaca, 2021 IL App (2d) 210270, 196 N.E.3d 585. “The court then examined section 13-209 of the Code (735 ILCS 5/13-209 (West 2020)). It concluded that plaintiff was entitled to the appointment of a special representative despite the running of the limitations period.”
Relf v. Shatayeva, 2013 IL 114925. “The circuit court found the “special administrator’s” motion to be meritorious and dismissed, rejecting plaintiff’s arguments that the action should be deemed timely under the provisions of section 13-209 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/13-209 (West 2010)) which…”
Lichter v. Porter Carroll, 2023 IL 128468, 231 N.E.3d 147. “” 735 ILCS 5/13-209(b), (c) (West 2020). ¶ 11 Relying upon Relf v.”
Lichter v. Carroll, 2022 IL App (1st) 200828, 220 N.E.3d 1125.
735 ILCS 5/13-209(c): 21 cases
Relf v. Shatayeva, 2013 IL 114925, 998 N.E.2d 18. “The circuit court found the “special administrator’s” motion to be meritorious and dismissed, rejecting plaintiff’s arguments that the action should be deemed timely under the provisions of section 13-209 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/13-209 (West 2010)) which…”
Relf v. Shatayeva, 2013 IL 114925. “The circuit court found the “special administrator’s” motion to be meritorious and dismissed, rejecting plaintiff’s arguments that the action should be deemed timely under the provisions of section 13-209 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/13-209 (West 2010)) which…”
Augustus v. Est. of Somers, 662 N.E.2d 138 (Ill. App. Ct. 4th Dist. 1996). “Under section 13-209(c) of the Code, when a party commences an action against a deceased person whose death is unknown, the action may be refiled against the deceased person's personal representative so long as the amended complaint is filed within two years of the expiration of…”
Relf v. Shatayeva, 2012 IL App (1st) 112071, 975 N.E.2d 1204. “735 ILCS 5/13-209 (West 2010). Subsection (a) provides for when “a person entitled to bring an action dies” and, therefore, does not apply to the case at bar because the plaintiff is still alive.”
Walker v. Ware, 2013 IL App (1st) 122364, 988 N.E.2d 209.
735 ILCS 5/13-209(c)(1): 5 cases
Relf v. Shatayeva, 2013 IL 114925, 998 N.E.2d 18. “The circuit court found the “special administrator’s” motion to be meritorious and dismissed, rejecting plaintiff’s arguments that the action should be deemed timely under the provisions of section 13-209 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/13-209 (West 2010)) which…”
Relf v. Shatayeva, 2013 IL 114925. “The circuit court found the “special administrator’s” motion to be meritorious and dismissed, rejecting plaintiff’s arguments that the action should be deemed timely under the provisions of section 13-209 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/13-209 (West 2010)) which…”
Augustus v. Est. of Somers, 662 N.E.2d 138 (Ill. App. Ct. 4th Dist. 1996). “Under section 13-209(c) of the Code, when a party commences an action against a deceased person whose death is unknown, the action may be refiled against the deceased person's personal representative so long as the amended complaint is filed within two years of the expiration of…”
Bouloute v. Carrillo, 2024 IL App (1st) 220454-U.
Campos v. Campos, No. 1-02-1920 Rel (Ill. App. Ct. 1st Dist. Sept. 2, 2003).
735 ILCS 5/13-209(c)(2): 2 cases
Relf v. Shatayeva, 2013 IL 114925, 998 N.E.2d 18. “The circuit court found the “special administrator’s” motion to be meritorious and dismissed, rejecting plaintiff’s arguments that the action should be deemed timely under the provisions of section 13-209 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/13-209 (West 2010)) which…”
Relf v. Shatayeva, 2013 IL 114925. “The circuit court found the “special administrator’s” motion to be meritorious and dismissed, rejecting plaintiff’s arguments that the action should be deemed timely under the provisions of section 13-209 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/13-209 (West 2010)) which…”
735 ILCS 5/13-209(c)(3): 2 cases
Relf v. Shatayeva, 2013 IL 114925, 998 N.E.2d 18. “The circuit court found the “special administrator’s” motion to be meritorious and dismissed, rejecting plaintiff’s arguments that the action should be deemed timely under the provisions of section 13-209 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/13-209 (West 2010)) which…”
Relf v. Shatayeva, 2013 IL 114925. “The circuit court found the “special administrator’s” motion to be meritorious and dismissed, rejecting plaintiff’s arguments that the action should be deemed timely under the provisions of section 13-209 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/13-209 (West 2010)) which…”
735 ILCS 5/13-209(c)(4): 7 cases
Relf v. Shatayeva, 2013 IL 114925, 998 N.E.2d 18. “The circuit court found the “special administrator’s” motion to be meritorious and dismissed, rejecting plaintiff’s arguments that the action should be deemed timely under the provisions of section 13-209 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/13-209 (West 2010)) which…”
Relf v. Shatayeva, 2013 IL 114925. “The circuit court found the “special administrator’s” motion to be meritorious and dismissed, rejecting plaintiff’s arguments that the action should be deemed timely under the provisions of section 13-209 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/13-209 (West 2010)) which…”
Lichter v. Porter Carroll, 2023 IL 128468, 231 N.E.3d 147. “” 735 ILCS 5/13-209(b), (c) (West 2020). ¶ 11 Relying upon Relf v.”
Bouloute v. Carrillo, 2024 IL App (1st) 220454-U.
Sopron v. Cassidy, No. 1:19-cv-08254 (N.D. Ill. June 28, 2022).
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.
|