Illinois Compiled Statutes

735 ILCS 5/19-105 (2026)

Notice

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IL-ILGAilga.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(735 ILCS 5/19-105) (from Ch. 110, par. 19-105)
    Sec. 19-105. Notice. The defendant shall be given 5 days written notice in the manner required by rule of the Supreme Court, of a hearing before the court to contest the entry of an order for replevin. No order for replevin may be entered nor may property be seized pursuant to an order for replevin prior to such notice and hearing except as provided in Section 19-106 of this Act.
    As to any particular property, the right to notice and hearing established in this Section may not be waived by any consumer. As used in this Section, a consumer is an individual who obtained possession of the property for personal, family, household, or agricultural purposes.
    Any waiver of the right to notice and hearing established in this Section must be in writing and must be given voluntarily, intelligently, and knowingly.
(Source: P.A. 82-280.)

    
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2000–2022 · leading case: Neely v. Law Offices of Kevin J. Hermanek, P.C., 122 F. Supp. 2d 923 (N.D. Ill. 2000).
Neely v. Law Offices of Kevin J. Hermanek, P.C., 122 F. Supp. 2d 923 (N.D. Ill. 2000). “2d 556 (1972); 735 ILCS 5/19-105, but the notice requirement may be dispensed with “if the plaintiff establishes and the court finds as a matter of record and supported by evidence” that replevin without notice is required to “protect the plaintiff from an immediately impending…”
Sterling Design & Constr., LLC v. Sage Design & Constr., LLC (N.D. Ill. 2022). “” 735 ILCS 5/19-105; see also Fuentes v. Shevin, 407 U.”
State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Loop Operations, 2016 IL App (1st) 151545 (Ill. App. Ct. 2016). “See 735 ILCS 5/19-105 (West 2012). ¶ 13 Despite State Farm’s compliance with all statutory notice requirements, the trial judge decided that the statutory notice did not sufficiently protect Loop Operations’ property interest in the car State Farm owned, so the trial court…”
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.