Illinois Compiled Statutes
735 ILCS 5/19-104 (2026)
Complaint
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
IL-ILGAilga.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
(735 ILCS 5/19-104)
(from Ch. 110, par. 19-104)
Sec. 19-104.
Complaint.
An action of replevin shall be commenced by the filing of a verified
complaint which describes the property to be replevied and states that
the plaintiff in such action is the owner of the property so described,
or that he or she is then lawfully entitled to the possession thereof, and that
the property is wrongfully detained by the defendant, and that the same
has not been taken for any tax, assessment, or fine levied by virtue of
any law of this State, against the property of such plaintiff, or
against him or her individually, nor seized under any lawful process
against the goods and chattels of such plaintiff subject to such lawful
process, nor held by virtue of any order for replevin against such
plaintiff.
(Source: P.A. 82-280.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9
cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1997–2026 · leading case: Liceaga v. Baez, 2019 IL App (1st) 181170 (Ill. App. Ct. 2019).
Liceaga v. Baez, 2019 IL App (1st) 181170 (Ill. App. Ct. 2019). “” 735 ILCS 5/19-104 (West 2016). ¶ 11 Based on the case of Carroll v.”
Hitt v. Stephens, 675 N.E.2d 275 (Ill. App. Ct. 1997). “Applying the Rozny test, the proof in the replevin action (see 735 ILCS 5/19-104 (West 1994)) does not seem appreciably more difficult now.”
Liceaga v. Baez, 2019 IL App (1st) 181170 (Ill. App. Ct. 2019). “Section 19-104 of the Code of Civil Procedure provides in relevant part that "[a]n action of replevin shall be commenced by the filing of a verified complaint which describes the property to be replevied and states that the plaintiff in such action is the owner of the property…”
In re Est. of Hutchinson, 2023 IL App (2d) 220035-U (Ill. App. Ct. 2023). “” 735 ILCS 5/19-104 (West 2018). Then, at the hearing the petitioner must establish “a prima facie case to a superior right to possession of the disputed property” and demonstrate “the probability that [he] will ultimately prevail on the underlying claim to possession.”
State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Loop Operations, 2016 IL App (1st) 151545 (Ill. App. Ct. 2016). “Although State Farm showed that it complied with the notice provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure (Code) (735 ILCS 5/19-104, 19-105 (West 2012)), the trial judge held the notice inadequate, finding that the statute did not sufficiently protect Loop Operations’ rights.”
Harrison v. City of Chicago (N.D. Ill. 2022). “To the extent that allegation rests on disputed facts, those facts can be revealed in discovery and argued at the summary judgment stage.”
Waugh v. Hill (S.D. Ill. 2023). “28, 2013) (citing 735 ILCS 5/19-104; First Illini Bank v. Wittek Indus.”
U.S. Bank Equip. Fin., a Div. of U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass'n v. RTA Logistic, Inc. (N.D. Ill. 2025). “See 735 ILCS 5/19-104; see also Gates v. Towery, 456 F.”
Motykie v. Motykie, 2026 IL App (1st) 241997-U (Ill. App. Ct. 2026). “735 ILCS 5/19-104 (West 2022). ¶ 67 Generally, we review a trial court’s decision granting or denying a declaratory judgment for an abuse of discretion.”
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.
|