ILCS » Chapter 735 · Act 5
Illinois Compiled Statutes

735 ILCS 5/2-209 (2026)

Act submitting to jurisdiction - Process

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IL-ILGAilga.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(735 ILCS 5/2-209) (from Ch. 110, par. 2-209)
    Sec. 2-209. Act submitting to jurisdiction - Process.
    (a) Any person, whether or not a citizen or resident of this State, who in person or through an agent does any of the acts hereinafter enumerated, thereby submits such person, and, if an individual, his or her personal representative, to the jurisdiction of the courts of this State as to any cause of action arising from the doing of any of such acts:
        (1) The transaction of any business within this State;
        (2) The commission of a tortious act within this
    
State;
        (3) The ownership, use, or possession of any real
    
estate situated in this State;
        (4) Contracting to insure any person, property or
    
risk located within this State at the time of contracting;
        (5) With respect to actions of dissolution of
    
marriage, declaration of invalidity of marriage and legal separation, the maintenance in this State of a matrimonial domicile at the time this cause of action arose or the commission in this State of any act giving rise to the cause of action;
        (6) With respect to actions brought under the
    
Illinois Parentage Act of 1984, as now or hereafter amended, or under the Illinois Parentage Act of 2015 on and after the effective date of that Act, the performance of an act of sexual intercourse within this State during the possible period of conception;
        (7) The making or performance of any contract or
    
promise substantially connected with this State;
        (8) The performance of sexual intercourse within this
    
State which is claimed to have resulted in the conception of a child who resides in this State;
        (9) The failure to support a child, spouse or former
    
spouse who has continued to reside in this State since the person either formerly resided with them in this State or directed them to reside in this State;
        (10) The acquisition of ownership, possession or
    
control of any asset or thing of value present within this State when ownership, possession or control was acquired;
        (11) The breach of any fiduciary duty within this
    
State;
        (12) The performance of duties as a director or
    
officer of a corporation organized under the laws of this State or having its principal place of business within this State;
        (13) The ownership of an interest in any trust
    
administered within this State; or
        (14) The exercise of powers granted under the
    
authority of this State as a fiduciary.
    (b) A court may exercise general jurisdiction in any action arising within or without this State against any person who:
        (1) Is a natural person present within this State
    
when served;
        (2) Is a natural person domiciled or resident within
    
this State when the cause of action arose, the action was commenced, or process was served;
        (3) Is a corporation organized under the laws of this
    
State or having its principal place of business in this State;
        (4) Is a natural person or corporation doing business
    
within this State; or
        (5) Is a foreign business corporation that has
    
consented to general jurisdiction in this State in accordance with subsection (b) of Section 13.20 or subsection (c-5) of Section 13.70 of the Business Corporation Act of 1983, but only if (i) the action alleges injury or illness resulting from exposure to a substance defined as toxic under the Uniform Hazardous Substances Act of Illinois, whether the cause of action arises within or without this State, and (ii) jurisdiction is proper as to one or more named co-defendants under subsection (a) of this Section.
    (b-5) Foreign defamation judgment. The courts of this State shall have personal jurisdiction over any person who obtains a judgment in a defamation proceeding outside the United States against any person who is a resident of Illinois or, if not a natural person, has its principal place of business in Illinois, for the purposes of rendering declaratory relief with respect to that resident's liability for the judgment, or for the purpose of determining whether said judgment should be deemed non-recognizable pursuant to this Code, to the fullest extent permitted by the United States Constitution, provided:
        (1) the publication at issue was published in
    
Illinois, and
        (2) that resident (i) has assets in Illinois which
    
might be used to satisfy the foreign defamation judgment, or (ii) may have to take actions in Illinois to comply with the foreign defamation judgment.
    The provisions of this subsection (b-5) shall apply to persons who obtained judgments in defamation proceedings outside the United States prior to, on, or after the effective date of this amendatory Act of the 95th General Assembly.
    (c) A court may also exercise jurisdiction on any other basis now or hereafter permitted by the Illinois Constitution and the Constitution of the United States.
    (d) Service of process upon any person who is subject to the jurisdiction of the courts of this State, as provided in this Section, may be made by personally serving the summons upon the defendant outside this State, as provided in this Act, with the same force and effect as though summons had been personally served within this State.
    (e) Service of process upon any person who resides or whose business address is outside the United States and who is subject to the jurisdiction of the courts of this State, as provided in this Section, in any action based upon product liability may be made by serving a copy of the summons with a copy of the complaint attached upon the Secretary of State. The summons shall be accompanied by a $5 fee payable to the Secretary of State. The plaintiff shall forthwith mail a copy of the summons, upon which the date of service upon the Secretary is clearly shown, together with a copy of the complaint to the defendant at his or her last known place of residence or business address. Plaintiff shall file with the circuit clerk an affidavit of the plaintiff or his or her attorney stating the last known place of residence or the last known business address of the defendant and a certificate of mailing a copy of the summons and complaint to the defendant at such address as required by this subsection (e). The certificate of mailing shall be prima facie evidence that the plaintiff or his or her attorney mailed a copy of the summons and complaint to the defendant as required. Service of the summons shall be deemed to have been made upon the defendant on the date it is served upon the Secretary and shall have the same force and effect as though summons had been personally served upon the defendant within this State.
    (f) Only causes of action arising from acts enumerated herein may be asserted against a defendant in an action in which jurisdiction over him or her is based upon subsection (a).
    (g) Nothing herein contained limits or affects the right to serve any process in any other manner now or hereafter provided by law.
(Source: P.A. 104-352, eff. 8-15-25.)

    
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 387 cases (96 in the last 5 years), 1993–2026 · leading case: Burgauer v. Burgauer, 2019 IL App (3d) 170545 (Ill. App. Ct. 2019).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Burgauer v. Burgauer, 2019 IL App (3d) 170545 (Ill. App. Ct. 2019). · cites it 17× “2d 778 ; see 735 ILCS 5/2-209(a), (b), (c) (West 2016).”
Cardenas Mktg. Network v. Pabon, 2012 IL App (1st) 111645 (Ill. App. Ct. 2012). · cites it 9× “¶ 10 On August 11, 2010, defendant filed a motion to dismiss plaintiff’s complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction pursuant to section 2-209 (735 ILCS 5/2-209 (West 2010)). Defendant argued that the court did not have personal jurisdiction over defendant under section 2-209…”
Christopher Bilek v. Fed. Ins. Co., 8 F.4th 581 (7th Cir. 2021). · cites it 2× “Bilek seeks to attribute the lead gener- ators’ alleged conduct to Health Insurance Innovations to es- tablish specific personal jurisdiction over Health Insurance No.”
Russell v. SNFA, 2013 IL 113909 (Ill. 2013). · cites it 3× “¶ 27 Plaintiff responds that the appellate court properly found that defendant was subject to specific personal jurisdiction in Illinois under applicable provisions of the Illinois long-arm statute (735 ILCS 5/2-209(a), (c) (West 2002)). Plaintiff argues that the appellate…”
Madison Miracle Prods., LLC v. MGM Distrib. Co., 2012 IL App (1st) 112334 (Ill. App. Ct. 2012). · cites it 5× “¶ 43 First, we note that the Illinois long-arm statute–the common name given to section 2-209 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/2-209 (West 2010))–contains a number of enumerated acts by which a nonresident defendant is deemed to subject itself to the jurisdiction of…”
Aspen Am. Ins. Co. v. Interstate Warehouseing, Inc., 2017 IL 121281 (Ill. 2017). · cites it 3× “That provision states that a court may exercise jurisdiction on any "basis now or hereafter permitted by the Illinois Constitution and the Constitution of the United States.”
Solargenix Energy, LLC v. Acciona, 2014 IL App (1st) 123403 (Ill. App. Ct. 2014). · cites it 6× “Jurisdictional Provisions ¶27 The Illinois long-arm statute, section 2-209 of the Code (735 ILCS 5/2-209 (West 2010)), provides several bases upon which Illinois courts may exercise personal jurisdiction over a nonresident defendant.”
Charles Curry v. Revolution Labs., LLC, 949 F.3d 385 (7th Cir. 2020). “” 735 ILCS 5/2-209(c). We have held that “the Illinois long-arm statute permits the exercise of jurisdic- tion to the full extent permitted by the Fourteenth Amend- ment’s Due Process Clause.”
Innovative Garage Door Co. v. High Ranking Domains, LLC, 2012 IL App (2d) 120117 (Ill. App. Ct. 2012). · cites it 5× “ANALYSIS ¶ 10 Innovative contends that the trial court erred in dismissing the case, arguing that HRD was subject to the lawsuit in Illinois because it collected information from Illinois residents via its Internet business and sold that information to Innovative in Illinois.”
C.S.B. Commodities, Inc. v. Urban Trend (HK) Ltd., 626 F. Supp. 2d 837 (N.D. Ill. 2009). · cites it 4× “rgument is that by purposefully travelling to Illinois to garner business and sales for the allegedly infringing product, Urban Trend was “transacting business” under the Illinois long-arm statute (735 ILCS 5/2-209(a) (1)) or, in the alternative, that Urban Trend’s actions…”
Janmark, Inc. v. James T. Reidy & Dreamkeeper, Inc., 132 F.3d 1200 (7th Cir. 1997). · cites it 3× “One such threat, which induced a customer in New Jersey to cease buying shopping carts from Janmark, is the basis of Janmark’s contention that Dreamkeeper has committed a tort “within” Illinois and therefore is amenable to process under its long-arm statute, 735 ILCS…”
Haubner v. Abercrombie & Kent Intern., Inc., 812 N.E.2d 704 (Ill. App. Ct. 2004). · cites it 7× “735 ILCS 5/2-209(a)(1) and (b)(4) (West 2000).”
Show all 387 citing cases →
— 735 ILCS 5/2-209(2) — 1 case
Osundairo v. Glandian (N.D. Ill. 2020).
— 735 ILCS 5/2-209(a) — 46 cases
Christopher Bilek v. Fed. Ins. Co., 8 F.4th 581 (7th Cir. 2021). “Bilek seeks to attribute the lead gener- ators’ alleged conduct to Health Insurance Innovations to es- tablish specific personal jurisdiction over Health Insurance No.”
Russell v. SNFA, 2013 IL 113909 (Ill. 2013). “¶ 27 Plaintiff responds that the appellate court properly found that defendant was subject to specific personal jurisdiction in Illinois under applicable provisions of the Illinois long-arm statute (735 ILCS 5/2-209(a), (c) (West 2002)). Plaintiff argues that the appellate…”
Burgauer v. Burgauer, 2019 IL App (3d) 170545 (Ill. App. Ct. 2019). “2d 778 ; see 735 ILCS 5/2-209(a), (b), (c) (West 2016).”
Solargenix Energy, LLC v. Acciona, 2014 IL App (1st) 123403 (Ill. App. Ct. 2014). “Jurisdictional Provisions ¶27 The Illinois long-arm statute, section 2-209 of the Code (735 ILCS 5/2-209 (West 2010)), provides several bases upon which Illinois courts may exercise personal jurisdiction over a nonresident defendant.”
Kowal v. Westchester Wheels, Inc., 2017 IL App (1st) 152293 (Ill. App. Ct. 2017).
— 735 ILCS 5/2-209(a)(1) — 36 cases
Haubner v. Abercrombie & Kent Intern., Inc., 812 N.E.2d 704 (Ill. App. Ct. 2004). “735 ILCS 5/2-209(a)(1) and (b)(4) (West 2000).”
Burgauer v. Burgauer, 2019 IL App (3d) 170545 (Ill. App. Ct. 2019). “2d 778 ; see 735 ILCS 5/2-209(a), (b), (c) (West 2016).”
Kowal v. Westchester Wheels, Inc., 2017 IL App (1st) 152293 (Ill. App. Ct. 2017).
Madison Miracle Prods., LLC v. MGM Distrib. Co., 2012 IL App (1st) 112334 (Ill. App. Ct. 2012). “¶ 43 First, we note that the Illinois long-arm statute–the common name given to section 2-209 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/2-209 (West 2010))–contains a number of enumerated acts by which a nonresident defendant is deemed to subject itself to the jurisdiction of…”
C.S.B. Commodities, Inc. v. Urban Trend (HK) Ltd., 626 F. Supp. 2d 837 (N.D. Ill. 2009). “rgument is that by purposefully travelling to Illinois to garner business and sales for the allegedly infringing product, Urban Trend was “transacting business” under the Illinois long-arm statute (735 ILCS 5/2-209(a) (1)) or, in the alternative, that Urban Trend’s actions…”
— 735 ILCS 5/2-209(a)(10) — 7 cases
In re Marriage of Difiglio, 2016 IL App (3d) 160037 (Ill. App. Ct. 2016).
Burgauer v. Burgauer, 2019 IL App (3d) 170545 (Ill. App. Ct. 2019). “2d 778 ; see 735 ILCS 5/2-209(a), (b), (c) (West 2016).”
In re Marriage of DiFiglio, 2016 IL App (3d) 160037 (Ill. App. Ct. 2016).
Capra v. Lipschultz, 2020 IL App (1st) 192160 (Ill. App. Ct. 2020).
Capra v. Lipschultz, 2020 IL App (1st) 192160 (Ill. App. Ct. 2021).
— 735 ILCS 5/2-209(a)(11) — 2 cases
Burgauer v. Burgauer, 2019 IL App (3d) 170545 (Ill. App. Ct. 2019). “2d 778 ; see 735 ILCS 5/2-209(a), (b), (c) (West 2016).”
Anderson v. Anderson, 2021 IL App (3d) 200497-U (Ill. App. Ct. 2021).
— 735 ILCS 5/2-209(a)(12) — 3 cases
Hach Co. v. Hakuto Co., Ltd., 784 F. Supp. 2d 977 (N.D. Ill. 2011).
Banwell v. Illinois Coll. of Optometry, 981 F. Supp. 1137 (N.D. Ill. 1997).
Batton v. The Nat'l Ass'n of Realtors (N.D. Ill. 2024).
— 735 ILCS 5/2-209(a)(13) — 3 cases
Burgauer v. Burgauer, 2019 IL App (3d) 170545 (Ill. App. Ct. 2019). “2d 778 ; see 735 ILCS 5/2-209(a), (b), (c) (West 2016).”
Kaufman v. Barbiero, 2013 IL App (1st) 132068 (Ill. App. Ct. 2013).
Sullivan v. Kodsi (Ill. App. Ct. 2005).
— 735 ILCS 5/2-209(a)(14) — 2 cases
Capra v. Lipschultz, 2020 IL App (1st) 192160 (Ill. App. Ct. 2020).
Capra v. Lipschultz, 2020 IL App (1st) 192160 (Ill. App. Ct. 2021).
— 735 ILCS 5/2-209(a)(2) — 42 cases
Bombliss v. Cornelsen, 824 N.E.2d 1175 (Ill. App. Ct. 2005).
Philos Tech., Inc. v. Philos & D, Inc., 802 F.3d 905 (7th Cir. 2015).
Janmark, Inc. v. James T. Reidy & Dreamkeeper, Inc., 132 F.3d 1200 (7th Cir. 1997). “One such threat, which induced a customer in New Jersey to cease buying shopping carts from Janmark, is the basis of Janmark’s contention that Dreamkeeper has committed a tort “within” Illinois and therefore is amenable to process under its long-arm statute, 735 ILCS…”
Ids Life Ins. Co. v. Sunamerica Life Ins. Co., 136 F.3d 537 (7th Cir. 1998).
Wesly v. The Nat'l Hemophilia Found., 2017 IL App (3d) 160382 (Ill. App. Ct. 2017).
— 735 ILCS 5/2-209(a)(2)(1998) — 1 case
Cleary v. Philip Morris, Inc. (Ill. App. Ct. 2000).
— 735 ILCS 5/2-209(a)(3) — 2 cases
Burgauer v. Burgauer, 2019 IL App (3d) 170545 (Ill. App. Ct. 2019). “2d 778 ; see 735 ILCS 5/2-209(a), (b), (c) (West 2016).”
J&J Sports Prods., Inc. v. Fialko (N.D. Ill. 2018).
— 735 ILCS 5/2-209(a)(6) — 1 case
People Ex. Rel. Black v. Neby, 638 N.E.2d 276 (Ill. App. Ct. 1994).
— 735 ILCS 5/2-209(a)(7) — 17 cases
Cardenas Mktg. Network v. Pabon, 2012 IL App (1st) 111645 (Ill. App. Ct. 2012). “¶ 10 On August 11, 2010, defendant filed a motion to dismiss plaintiff’s complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction pursuant to section 2-209 (735 ILCS 5/2-209 (West 2010)). Defendant argued that the court did not have personal jurisdiction over defendant under section 2-209…”
Burgauer v. Burgauer, 2019 IL App (3d) 170545 (Ill. App. Ct. 2019). “2d 778 ; see 735 ILCS 5/2-209(a), (b), (c) (West 2016).”
WAV, Inc. v. Walpole Island First Nation, 47 F. Supp. 3d 720 (N.D. Ill. 2014).
Khan v. Gramercy Advisors, LLC, 2016 IL App (4th) 150435 (Ill. App. Ct. 2016).
M.M. v. GlaxoSmithKline LLC, 2016 IL App (1st) 151909 (Ill. App. Ct. 2016).
— 735 ILCS 5/2-209(a)(9) — 4 cases
Dinerstein v. Evanston Athletic Clubs, Inc., 2016 IL App (1st) 153388 (Ill. App. Ct. 2016).
In re Marriage of Robinson, 2015 IL App (1st) 132345 (Ill. App. Ct. 2015).
In re Marriage of Robinson, 2015 IL App (1st) 132345 (Ill. App. Ct. 2015).
In re Marriage of Burrelsman, 2020 IL App (5th) 190231-U (Ill. App. Ct. 2020).
— 735 ILCS 5/2-209(a)(l) — 8 cases
Berthold Types Ltd. v. Eur. Mikrograf Corp., 102 F. Supp. 2d 928 (N.D. Ill. 2000).
In re Honey Transshipping Litig., 87 F. Supp. 3d 855 (N.D. Ill. 2015).
North Am. Philips Corp. v. Am. Vending Sales, Inc., 35 F.3d 1576 (Fed. Cir. 1994).
Banwell v. Illinois Coll. of Optometry, 981 F. Supp. 1137 (N.D. Ill. 1997).
Vilchis v. Miami Univ. of Ohio, 99 F. App'x 743 (7th Cir. 2004).
— 735 ILCS 5/2-209(a)(l)(7) — 1 case
McDonald's Corp. v. Bukele, 960 F. Supp. 1311 (N.D. Ill. 1997).
— 735 ILCS 5/2-209(b) — 6 cases
Cardenas Mktg. Network v. Pabon, 2012 IL App (1st) 111645 (Ill. App. Ct. 2012). “¶ 10 On August 11, 2010, defendant filed a motion to dismiss plaintiff’s complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction pursuant to section 2-209 (735 ILCS 5/2-209 (West 2010)). Defendant argued that the court did not have personal jurisdiction over defendant under section 2-209…”
C.S.B. Commodities, Inc. v. Urban Trend (HK) Ltd., 626 F. Supp. 2d 837 (N.D. Ill. 2009). “rgument is that by purposefully travelling to Illinois to garner business and sales for the allegedly infringing product, Urban Trend was “transacting business” under the Illinois long-arm statute (735 ILCS 5/2-209(a) (1)) or, in the alternative, that Urban Trend’s actions…”
Solargenix Energy, LLC v. Acciona, 2014 IL App (1st) 123403 (Ill. App. Ct. 2014). “Jurisdictional Provisions ¶27 The Illinois long-arm statute, section 2-209 of the Code (735 ILCS 5/2-209 (West 2010)), provides several bases upon which Illinois courts may exercise personal jurisdiction over a nonresident defendant.”
Burgauer v. Burgauer, 2019 IL App (3d) 170545 (Ill. App. Ct. 2019). “2d 778 ; see 735 ILCS 5/2-209(a), (b), (c) (West 2016).”
Wesly v. The Nat'l Hemophilia Found., 2017 IL App (3d) 160382 (Ill. App. Ct. 2017).
— 735 ILCS 5/2-209(b)(1) — 4 cases
Buron v. Lignar, 2020 IL App (1st) 192152 (Ill. App. Ct. 2020).
Cmty. Merch. Servs., Inc. v. Jonas (Ill. App. Ct. 2004).
In re Jill R. Modified Upon Denial of Rehearing on 3/7/03 (Ill. App. Ct. 2003).
In re Marriage of Vailas (Ill. App. Ct. 2010).
— 735 ILCS 5/2-209(b)(2) — 3 cases
Akel v. Rahman, 2020 IL App (1st) 191424-U (Ill. App. Ct. 2020).
In re Marriage of Kosmond (Ill. App. Ct. 2005).
In re: Marriage of Seffren (Ill. App. Ct. 2006).
— 735 ILCS 5/2-209(b)(3) — 7 cases
Burgauer v. Burgauer, 2019 IL App (3d) 170545 (Ill. App. Ct. 2019). “2d 778 ; see 735 ILCS 5/2-209(a), (b), (c) (West 2016).”
Solargenix Energy, LLC v. Acciona, 2014 IL App (1st) 123403 (Ill. App. Ct. 2014). “Jurisdictional Provisions ¶27 The Illinois long-arm statute, section 2-209 of the Code (735 ILCS 5/2-209 (West 2010)), provides several bases upon which Illinois courts may exercise personal jurisdiction over a nonresident defendant.”
Russell v. SNFA, 965 N.E.2d 1 (Ill. App. Ct. 2011).
Soria v. Chrysler Canada, Inc., 958 N.E.2d 285 (Ill. App. Ct. 2011).
Solargenix Energy, LLC v. Acciona, S.A., 2014 IL App (1st) 123403 (Ill. App. Ct. 2014).
— 735 ILCS 5/2-209(b)(4) — 35 cases
Aspen Am. Ins. Co. v. Interstate Warehouseing, Inc., 2017 IL 121281 (Ill. 2017). “That provision states that a court may exercise jurisdiction on any "basis now or hereafter permitted by the Illinois Constitution and the Constitution of the United States.”
Burgauer v. Burgauer, 2019 IL App (3d) 170545 (Ill. App. Ct. 2019). “2d 778 ; see 735 ILCS 5/2-209(a), (b), (c) (West 2016).”
Haubner v. Abercrombie & Kent Intern., Inc., 812 N.E.2d 704 (Ill. App. Ct. 2004). “735 ILCS 5/2-209(a)(1) and (b)(4) (West 2000).”
Cardenas Mktg. Network v. Pabon, 2012 IL App (1st) 111645 (Ill. App. Ct. 2012). “¶ 10 On August 11, 2010, defendant filed a motion to dismiss plaintiff’s complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction pursuant to section 2-209 (735 ILCS 5/2-209 (West 2010)). Defendant argued that the court did not have personal jurisdiction over defendant under section 2-209…”
Wesly v. The Nat'l Hemophilia Found., 2017 IL App (3d) 160382 (Ill. App. Ct. 2017).
— 735 ILCS 5/2-209(c) — 248 cases
Charles Curry v. Revolution Labs., LLC, 949 F.3d 385 (7th Cir. 2020). “” 735 ILCS 5/2-209(c). We have held that “the Illinois long-arm statute permits the exercise of jurisdic- tion to the full extent permitted by the Fourteenth Amend- ment’s Due Process Clause.”
Christopher Bilek v. Fed. Ins. Co., 8 F.4th 581 (7th Cir. 2021). “Bilek seeks to attribute the lead gener- ators’ alleged conduct to Health Insurance Innovations to es- tablish specific personal jurisdiction over Health Insurance No.”
Hyatt Int'l Corp. v. Gerardo Coco, 302 F.3d 707 (7th Cir. 2002).
NBA Props., Inc. v. HANWJH, 46 F.4th 614 (7th Cir. 2022).
J.S.T. Corp. v. Foxconn Interconnect Technolog, 965 F.3d 571 (7th Cir. 2020).
— 735 ILCS 5/2-209(e) — 4 cases
Spherion Corp. v. Cincinnati Fin. Corp., 183 F. Supp. 2d 1052 (N.D. Ill. 2002).
Fletcher v. Doig, 125 F. Supp. 3d 697 (N.D. Ill. 2014).
Eagle Air Transp., Inc. v. Nat'l Aerotech Aviation Delaware, Inc., 75 F. Supp. 3d 883 (N.D. Ill. 2014).
FMC Corp. v. Trimac Bulk Transp. Servs., Inc., 97 F. Supp. 2d 872 (N.D. Ill. 2000).
— 735 ILCS 5/2-209(f) — 2 cases
Alderson v. S. Co. (Ill. App. Ct. 2001).
Kalata v. Healy (Ill. App. Ct. 2000).
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.