ILCS » Chapter 735 · Act 5
Illinois Compiled Statutes

735 ILCS 5/2-1001 (2026)

Substitution of judge

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IL-ILGAilga.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(735 ILCS 5/2-1001) (from Ch. 110, par. 2-1001)
    Sec. 2-1001. Substitution of judge.
    (a) A substitution of judge in any civil action may be had in the following situations:
        (1) Involvement of judge. When the judge is a party
    
or interested in the action, or his or her testimony is material to either of the parties to the action, or he or she is related to or has been counsel for any party in regard to the matter in controversy. In any such situation a substitution of judge may be awarded by the court with or without the application of either party.
        (2) Substitution as of right. When a party timely
    
exercises his or her right to a substitution without cause as provided in this paragraph (2).
            (i) Each party shall be entitled to one
        
substitution of judge without cause as a matter of right.
            (ii) An application for substitution of judge as
        
of right shall be made by motion and shall be granted if it is presented before trial or hearing begins and before the judge to whom it is presented has ruled on any substantial issue in the case, or if it is presented by consent of the parties.
            (iii) If any party has not entered an appearance
        
in the case and has not been found in default, rulings in the case by the judge on any substantial issue before the party's appearance shall not be grounds for denying an otherwise timely application for substitution of judge as of right by the party.
        (3) Substitution for cause. When cause exists.
            (i) Each party shall be entitled to a
        
substitution or substitutions of judge for cause.
            (ii) Every application for substitution of judge
        
for cause shall be made by petition, setting forth the specific cause for substitution and praying a substitution of judge. The petition shall be verified by the affidavit of the applicant.
            (iii) Upon the filing of a petition for
        
substitution of judge for cause, a hearing to determine whether the cause exists shall be conducted as soon as possible by a judge other than the judge named in the petition. The judge named in the petition need not testify but may submit an affidavit if the judge wishes. If the petition is allowed, the case shall be assigned to a judge not named in the petition. If the petition is denied, the case shall be assigned back to the judge named in the petition.
        (4) Substitution in contempt proceedings. When any
    
defendant in a proceeding for contempt arising from an attack upon the character or conduct of a judge occurring otherwise than in open court, and the proceeding is pending before the judge whose character or conduct was impugned, fears that he or she will not receive a fair and impartial trial before that judge. In any such situation the application shall be by petition, verified by the applicant, and shall be filed before the trial of the contempt proceeding.
    (b) An application for substitution of judge may be made to the court in which the case is pending, reasonable notice of the application having been given to the adverse party or his or her attorney.
    (c) When a substitution of judge is granted, the case may be assigned to some other judge in the same county, or in some other convenient county, to which there is no valid objection. If the case is assigned to a judge in some other county, the provisions of subsections (f) through (m) of Section 2-1001.5 shall apply.
(Source: P.A. 94-531, eff. 1-1-06.)

    
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 185 cases (60 in the last 5 years), 1993–2026 · leading case: In re Marriage of O'Brien, 2011 IL 109039 (Ill. 2011).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
In re Marriage of O'Brien, 2011 IL 109039 (Ill. 2011). · cites it 21× “A circuit court’s determination as to whether sufficient cause exists to order substitution under section 2-1001 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/2-1001 (West 2006)) will be upheld unless it is contrary to the manifest weight of the evidence.”
In Re Est. of Wilson, 939 N.E.2d 426 (Ill. 2010). · cites it 20× “" 735 ILCS 5/2-1001 (West 2006). The plain language of section 2-1001(a)(3) does not authorize an Illinois judge accused of bias or prejudice in a civil proceeding to control the disposition of the petition seeking substitution of judge for cause.”
In Re Marriage of O'Brien, 958 N.E.2d 647 (Ill. 2011). · cites it 28× “¶ 150 And so we come to the ultimate question in this case, whether the judge who ruled on John's petition in this case properly concluded that it should be denied.”
In Re D.F., 777 N.E.2d 930 (Ill. 2002). · cites it 6× “Respondent also argued on appeal that the trial court erred by denying her motion for substitution of judge for cause pursuant to section 2-1001(a)(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure ( 735 ILCS 5/2-1001 (a)(3) (West 1998)). The appellate court rejected this argument, finding that…”
People v. Johnson, 2022 IL App (1st) 201371 (Ill. App. Ct. 2022). · cites it 10× “735 ILCS 5/2-1001(a) (West 2018). Whether judicial review of a TIRC disposition is a “civil action” for purposes of section 2-1001(a) is apparently an issue of first impression.”
Bowman v. Ottney, 2015 IL 119000 (Ill. 2015). · cites it 8× “ution of judge, but granted her request for certification of the following question for interlocutory appeal under Rule 308(a): “In a case which had previously been voluntarily dismissed pursuant to 735 ILCS 5/2-1009 and then subsequently re-filed, does the trial court have…”
Cincinnati Ins. Co. v. Chapman, 2012 IL App (1st) 111792 (Ill. App. Ct. 2012). · cites it 8× “735 ILCS 5/2-1001(a)(2) (West 2010). The circuit court certified the following question pursuant to Illinois Supreme Court Rule 308 (eff.”
Schnepf v. Schnepf, 2013 IL App (4th) 121142 (Ill. App. Ct. 2013). · cites it 9× “5 to distinguish between “substitution of judge” (735 ILCS 5/2-1001 (West 1992)) and “change of venue” (735 ILCS 5/2-1001.”
Aussieker v. City of Bloomington, 822 N.E.2d 927 (Ill. App. Ct. 2005). · cites it 8× “Justice STEIGMANN delivered the opinion of the court: In this case, we consider whether each plaintiff in a multiple-plaintiff civil case is entitled to one motion for substitution of judge as of right under section 2-1001(a)(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure (Civil Code) (735…”
Ramos v. Kewanee Hosp., 2013 IL App (3d) 120001 (Ill. App. Ct. 2013). · cites it 5× “11-L-4 and, shortly thereafter, moved for substitution of judge pursuant to section 2-1001(a)(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure (the Code) (735 ILCS 5/2-1001(a)(2) (West 2010)). The trial court denied plaintiff’s motion.”
Palos Cmty. Hosp. v. Humana Ins. Co., Inc., 2021 IL 126008 (Ill. 2021). · cites it 4× “OPINION ¶1 At issue is whether the “test the waters” doctrine constitutes a valid basis on which to deny a party’s motion for substitution of judge as of right under section 2- 1001(a)(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure (Code) (735 ILCS 5/2-1001(a)(2) (West 2016)). We conclude…”
In Re Est. of Wilson, 905 N.E.2d 957 (Ill. App. Ct. 2009). · cites it 10× “" 735 ILCS 5/2-1001 (West 2006). Our research shows that the statutory language requiring a hearing "by a judge other than the judge named in the petition" is an addition to the statute which became effective in 1993.”
Show all 185 citing cases →
— 735 ILCS 5/2-1001(3) — 1 case
People v. Hall, 2022 IL App (3d) 190690-U (Ill. App. Ct. 2022).
— 735 ILCS 5/2-1001(a) — 15 cases
People v. Johnson, 2022 IL App (1st) 201371 (Ill. App. Ct. 2022). “735 ILCS 5/2-1001(a) (West 2018). Whether judicial review of a TIRC disposition is a “civil action” for purposes of section 2-1001(a) is apparently an issue of first impression.”
In re Marriage of O'Brien, 2011 IL 109039 (Ill. 2011). “A circuit court’s determination as to whether sufficient cause exists to order substitution under section 2-1001 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/2-1001 (West 2006)) will be upheld unless it is contrary to the manifest weight of the evidence.”
Bowman v. Ottney, 2015 IL 119000 (Ill. 2015). “ution of judge, but granted her request for certification of the following question for interlocutory appeal under Rule 308(a): “In a case which had previously been voluntarily dismissed pursuant to 735 ILCS 5/2-1009 and then subsequently re-filed, does the trial court have…”
In Re Marriage of O'Brien, 958 N.E.2d 647 (Ill. 2011). “¶ 150 And so we come to the ultimate question in this case, whether the judge who ruled on John's petition in this case properly concluded that it should be denied.”
Bowman v. Ottney, 2015 IL App (5th) 140215 (Ill. App. Ct. 2015).
— 735 ILCS 5/2-1001(a)(1) — 9 cases
In re Marriage of O'Brien, 2011 IL 109039 (Ill. 2011). “A circuit court’s determination as to whether sufficient cause exists to order substitution under section 2-1001 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/2-1001 (West 2006)) will be upheld unless it is contrary to the manifest weight of the evidence.”
In Re Marriage of O'Brien, 958 N.E.2d 647 (Ill. 2011). “¶ 150 And so we come to the ultimate question in this case, whether the judge who ruled on John's petition in this case properly concluded that it should be denied.”
In re Marriage of Peradotti, 2018 IL App (2d) 180247 (Ill. App. Ct. 2018).
In Re Df, 748 N.E.2d 271 (Ill. App. Ct. 2001).
People v. Fleming, 321 Ill. App. 3d 211 (Ill. App. Ct. 2001).
— 735 ILCS 5/2-1001(a)(2) — 76 cases
Cincinnati Ins. Co. v. Chapman, 2012 IL App (1st) 111792 (Ill. App. Ct. 2012). “735 ILCS 5/2-1001(a)(2) (West 2010). The circuit court certified the following question pursuant to Illinois Supreme Court Rule 308 (eff.”
Aussieker v. City of Bloomington, 822 N.E.2d 927 (Ill. App. Ct. 2005). “Justice STEIGMANN delivered the opinion of the court: In this case, we consider whether each plaintiff in a multiple-plaintiff civil case is entitled to one motion for substitution of judge as of right under section 2-1001(a)(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure (Civil Code) (735…”
Ramos v. Kewanee Hosp., 2013 IL App (3d) 120001 (Ill. App. Ct. 2013). “11-L-4 and, shortly thereafter, moved for substitution of judge pursuant to section 2-1001(a)(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure (the Code) (735 ILCS 5/2-1001(a)(2) (West 2010)). The trial court denied plaintiff’s motion.”
People v. Johnson, 2022 IL App (1st) 201371 (Ill. App. Ct. 2022). “735 ILCS 5/2-1001(a) (West 2018). Whether judicial review of a TIRC disposition is a “civil action” for purposes of section 2-1001(a) is apparently an issue of first impression.”
Schnepf v. Schnepf, 2013 IL App (4th) 121142 (Ill. App. Ct. 2013). “5 to distinguish between “substitution of judge” (735 ILCS 5/2-1001 (West 1992)) and “change of venue” (735 ILCS 5/2-1001.”
— 735 ILCS 5/2-1001(a)(2)(i) — 35 cases
Aussieker v. City of Bloomington, 822 N.E.2d 927 (Ill. App. Ct. 2005). “Justice STEIGMANN delivered the opinion of the court: In this case, we consider whether each plaintiff in a multiple-plaintiff civil case is entitled to one motion for substitution of judge as of right under section 2-1001(a)(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure (Civil Code) (735…”
Colagrossi v. The Royal Bank of Scotland, 2016 IL App (1st) 142216 (Ill. App. Ct. 2016).
Palos Cmty. Hosp. v. Humana Ins. Co., Inc., 2021 IL 126008 (Ill. 2021). “OPINION ¶1 At issue is whether the “test the waters” doctrine constitutes a valid basis on which to deny a party’s motion for substitution of judge as of right under section 2- 1001(a)(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure (Code) (735 ILCS 5/2-1001(a)(2) (West 2016)). We conclude…”
People v. Johnson, 2022 IL App (1st) 201371 (Ill. App. Ct. 2022). “735 ILCS 5/2-1001(a) (West 2018). Whether judicial review of a TIRC disposition is a “civil action” for purposes of section 2-1001(a) is apparently an issue of first impression.”
Schnepf v. Schnepf, 2013 IL App (4th) 121142 (Ill. App. Ct. 2013). “5 to distinguish between “substitution of judge” (735 ILCS 5/2-1001 (West 1992)) and “change of venue” (735 ILCS 5/2-1001.”
— 735 ILCS 5/2-1001(a)(2)(ii) — 40 cases
Bowman v. Ottney, 2015 IL 119000 (Ill. 2015). “ution of judge, but granted her request for certification of the following question for interlocutory appeal under Rule 308(a): “In a case which had previously been voluntarily dismissed pursuant to 735 ILCS 5/2-1009 and then subsequently re-filed, does the trial court have…”
In re Marriage of O'Brien, 2011 IL 109039 (Ill. 2011). “A circuit court’s determination as to whether sufficient cause exists to order substitution under section 2-1001 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/2-1001 (West 2006)) will be upheld unless it is contrary to the manifest weight of the evidence.”
People v. Johnson, 2022 IL App (1st) 201371 (Ill. App. Ct. 2022). “735 ILCS 5/2-1001(a) (West 2018). Whether judicial review of a TIRC disposition is a “civil action” for purposes of section 2-1001(a) is apparently an issue of first impression.”
People v. Smith, 665 N.E.2d 1215 (Ill. 1996).
In re J.S., 2020 IL App (1st) 191119 (Ill. App. Ct. 2021).
— 735 ILCS 5/2-1001(a)(2)(iii) — 7 cases
In re J.S., 2020 IL App (1st) 191119 (Ill. App. Ct. 2021).
In re Marriage of Paclik (Ill. App. Ct. 2007).
In re A.B., 2022 IL App (4th) 220267-U (Ill. App. Ct. 2022).
Bouvel v. Duggan, 2022 IL App (1st) 221320-U (Ill. App. Ct. 2022).
In re Est. of Harris, 2025 IL App (5th) 240575-U (Ill. App. Ct. 2025).
— 735 ILCS 5/2-1001(a)(3) — 55 cases
In Re Est. of Wilson, 939 N.E.2d 426 (Ill. 2010). “" 735 ILCS 5/2-1001 (West 2006). The plain language of section 2-1001(a)(3) does not authorize an Illinois judge accused of bias or prejudice in a civil proceeding to control the disposition of the petition seeking substitution of judge for cause.”
In re Marriage of O'Brien, 2011 IL 109039 (Ill. 2011). “A circuit court’s determination as to whether sufficient cause exists to order substitution under section 2-1001 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/2-1001 (West 2006)) will be upheld unless it is contrary to the manifest weight of the evidence.”
In Re Marriage of O'Brien, 958 N.E.2d 647 (Ill. 2011). “¶ 150 And so we come to the ultimate question in this case, whether the judge who ruled on John's petition in this case properly concluded that it should be denied.”
Shachter v. City of Chicago, 2011 IL App (1st) 103582 (Ill. App. Ct. 2011).
In re D.D., 2022 IL App (4th) 220257 (Ill. App. Ct. 2022).
— 735 ILCS 5/2-1001(a)(3)(i) — 3 cases
Deutsche Bank Nat'l Trust Co. v. Nichols, 2013 IL App (1st) 120350 (Ill. App. Ct. 2013).
In Re Jd, 772 N.E.2d 927 (Ill. App. Ct. 2002).
Dale v. Shelton, 2026 IL App (1st) 250698-U (Ill. App. Ct. 2026).
— 735 ILCS 5/2-1001(a)(3)(ii) — 17 cases
In Re Est. of Wilson, 939 N.E.2d 426 (Ill. 2010). “" 735 ILCS 5/2-1001 (West 2006). The plain language of section 2-1001(a)(3) does not authorize an Illinois judge accused of bias or prejudice in a civil proceeding to control the disposition of the petition seeking substitution of judge for cause.”
Petalino v. Williams, 2016 IL App (1st) 151861 (Ill. App. Ct. 2016).
In Re Marriage of O'Brien, 958 N.E.2d 647 (Ill. 2011). “¶ 150 And so we come to the ultimate question in this case, whether the judge who ruled on John's petition in this case properly concluded that it should be denied.”
Petalino v. Williams, 2016 IL App (1st) 151861 (Ill. App. Ct. 2016).
In Re Marriage of O'Brien, 912 N.E.2d 729 (Ill. App. Ct. 2009).
— 735 ILCS 5/2-1001(a)(3)(iii) — 18 cases
In Re Est. of Wilson, 939 N.E.2d 426 (Ill. 2010). “" 735 ILCS 5/2-1001 (West 2006). The plain language of section 2-1001(a)(3) does not authorize an Illinois judge accused of bias or prejudice in a civil proceeding to control the disposition of the petition seeking substitution of judge for cause.”
In re Marriage of O'Brien, 2011 IL 109039 (Ill. 2011). “A circuit court’s determination as to whether sufficient cause exists to order substitution under section 2-1001 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/2-1001 (West 2006)) will be upheld unless it is contrary to the manifest weight of the evidence.”
In Re Est. of Wilson, 905 N.E.2d 957 (Ill. App. Ct. 2009). “" 735 ILCS 5/2-1001 (West 2006). Our research shows that the statutory language requiring a hearing "by a judge other than the judge named in the petition" is an addition to the statute which became effective in 1993.”
Williams v. Est. of Cole, 914 N.E.2d 234 (Ill. App. Ct. 2009).
In Re Marriage of O'Brien, 958 N.E.2d 647 (Ill. 2011). “¶ 150 And so we come to the ultimate question in this case, whether the judge who ruled on John's petition in this case properly concluded that it should be denied.”
— 735 ILCS 5/2-1001(b) — 2 cases
In Re Df, 748 N.E.2d 271 (Ill. App. Ct. 2001).
People v. Fleming, 321 Ill. App. 3d 211 (Ill. App. Ct. 2001).
— 735 ILCS 5/2-1001(c) — 3 cases
In Re Est. of Gagliardo, 908 N.E.2d 1056 (Ill. App. Ct. 2009).
Horstmann, Bruce v. St. Clair Cnty. IL, 295 F. App'x 61 (7th Cir. 2008).
Stoller v. Uber, 2022 IL App (1st) 201088-U (Ill. App. Ct. 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.