735 ILCS 5/2-301
Objections to jurisdiction over the person
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
IL-ILGAilga.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
(735 ILCS 5/2-301)
(from Ch. 110, par. 2-301)
Sec. 2-301. Objections to jurisdiction over the person.
(a) Prior to the filing of any other pleading or motion
other than as set forth in subsection (a-6), a
party may
object to the court's jurisdiction over the party's person, either on the
ground
that
the party is not
amenable to process of a court of this State or on the ground of insufficiency
of process
or insufficiency of service of process, by filing a motion to dismiss the
entire
proceeding
or any cause of action involved in the proceeding or by filing a motion to
quash service of
process. Such a motion may be made singly or included with others in a
combined
motion, but the parts of a combined motion must be identified in the manner
described in
Section 2-619.1. Unless the facts that constitute the basis for the objection
are apparent
from papers already on file in the case, the motion must be supported by an
affidavit
setting forth those facts.
(a-5) (Blank).
(a-6) A party filing any other pleading or motion prior to the filing of a motion objecting to the court's jurisdiction over the party's person as set forth in subsection (a) waives all objections to the court's jurisdiction over the party's person prospectively, unless the initial motion filed is one of the following: (1) A motion for an extension of time to answer or | otherwise plead. |
(2) A motion filed under Section 2-1301, 2-1401, or | 2-1401.1. |
Any motion objecting to the court's jurisdiction over the party's person as set forth in subsection (a) shall be filed within 60 days of the court's order disposing of the initial motion filed under Section 2-1301, 2-1401, or 2-1401.1. Nothing in this subsection precludes a party from filing a motion under subsection (a) combined with a motion under Section 2-1301, 2-1401, or 2-1401.1. If such a combined motion is filed, any objection to the court's jurisdiction over the party's person is not waived. (b) In disposing of a motion objecting to the
court's jurisdiction over the person
of the objecting
party, the court shall
consider all matters apparent from the papers on file in the case,
affidavits submitted by any party, and any evidence adduced upon
contested issues of fact.
The court shall enter an appropriate order sustaining or overruling the
objection.
No determination of any issue of fact in
connection with the objection is a determination of the merits of the
case or any aspect thereof. A decision adverse to the objector does not
preclude the objector from making any motion or defense which he or she might
otherwise
have made.
(c) Error in ruling against the objecting party on
the objection is
waived by the party's taking part in further proceedings unless the objection
is on the ground that the party
is not
amenable to process issued by a court of this State.
(Source: P.A. 100-291, eff. 1-1-18.)
(735 ILCS 5/Art. II Pt. 4 heading) Part 4.
Parties
|
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 180
cases (46 in the last 5 years), 1997–2026 · leading case: BAC Home Loans Servicing, LP v. Mitchell
BAC Home Loans Servicing, LP v. Mitchell (2014)
“735 ILCS 5/2-301(a-5) (West 2010). The statute plainly provides that a party waives “all objections” to the court’s personal jurisdiction by filing a -8- responsive pleading or motion before challenging the court’s jurisdiction.”
BAC Home Loans Servicing, LP v. Mitchell (2014)
“735 ILCS 5/2-301(a-5) (West 2010). The statute plainly provides that a party waives “all objections” to the court’s personal jurisdiction by filing a responsive pleading or motion before challenging the court’s jurisdiction.”
Aurora Loan Services, LLC v. Kmiecik (2013)
“” 735 ILCS 5/2-301(a-5) (West 2010). ¶ 18 We agree with Aurora that defendant waived his objections to the court’s personal jurisdiction over him by filing his verified answer.”
Cameron v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. (1998)
“" 735 ILCS 5/2-301(a), (b) (West 1994). Plaintiffs argue that "a special appearance" means only one may be filed.”
Cardenas Marketing Network v. Pabon (2012)
“t defendant has forfeited his personal jurisdiction challenge in two ways: (1) the written contracts contain a clause selecting Illinois as the forum and consenting to jurisdiction; and (2) defendant did not file a motion objecting to the trial court’s exercise of personal…”
American Chartered Bank v. USMDS, Inc. (2013)
“” 735 ILCS 5/2-301(a-5) (West 2010). We review questions of jurisdiction de novo.”
In Re Estate of Ahern (2005)
“735 ILCS 5/2-301(a) (West 2002). A fundamental rule regarding personal jurisdiction and general appearance is that, unless a party makes a special appearance to object to a court's jurisdiction prior to filing any pleading or motion, any objection to personal jurisdiction is…”
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Sanders (2015)
“735 ILCS 5/2-301 (West 2012). In fact, it expressly sets forth that a party may contest jurisdiction only “by filing a motion to dismiss the entire proceeding or any cause of action involved in the proceeding or by filing a motion to quash service of process” and that “[s]uch a…”
Russell v. SNFA (2013)
“¶8 Thereafter, defendant moved to dismiss plaintiff’s claims against it for lack of in personam jurisdiction under section 2-301 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/2-301 (West 2006)).1 Specifically, defendant argued that it was not subject to personal jurisdiction in…”
Deutsche Bank National Trust Company v. Hall-Pilate (2011)
“” 735 ILCS 5/2-301(a), (a-5) (West 2008). ¶ 15 The cardinal rule in construing a statute, to which all others are subordinate, is to ascertain and give effect to the intent of the legislature.”
Rosestone Investments, LLC v. Garner (2014)
“See 735 ILCS 5/2-301(a-5) (West 2008) (when party files responsive pleading, he waives all objections to the trial court’s jurisdiction over him); Poplar Grove State Bank v.”
People v. Ocon (2014)
“” 735 ILCS 5/2-301(a), (a-5) (West 2010). ¶ 38 The Maiden court concluded that section 2-301 required a party to explicitly waive an objection to personal jurisdiction.”
— 735 ILCS 5/2-301(a) — 76 cases
BAC Home Loans Servicing, LP v. Mitchell (2014)
“735 ILCS 5/2-301(a-5) (West 2010). The statute plainly provides that a party waives “all objections” to the court’s personal jurisdiction by filing a -8- responsive pleading or motion before challenging the court’s jurisdiction.”
BAC Home Loans Servicing, LP v. Mitchell (2014)
“735 ILCS 5/2-301(a-5) (West 2010). The statute plainly provides that a party waives “all objections” to the court’s personal jurisdiction by filing a responsive pleading or motion before challenging the court’s jurisdiction.”
In Re Estate of Ahern (2005)
“735 ILCS 5/2-301(a) (West 2002). A fundamental rule regarding personal jurisdiction and general appearance is that, unless a party makes a special appearance to object to a court's jurisdiction prior to filing any pleading or motion, any objection to personal jurisdiction is…”
Deutsche Bank National Trust Company v. Hall-Pilate (2011)
“” 735 ILCS 5/2-301(a), (a-5) (West 2008). ¶ 15 The cardinal rule in construing a statute, to which all others are subordinate, is to ascertain and give effect to the intent of the legislature.”
People v. Ocon (2014)
“” 735 ILCS 5/2-301(a), (a-5) (West 2010). ¶ 38 The Maiden court concluded that section 2-301 required a party to explicitly waive an objection to personal jurisdiction.”
— 735 ILCS 5/2-301(b) — 11 cases
Cameron v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. (1998)
“" 735 ILCS 5/2-301(a), (b) (West 1994). Plaintiffs argue that "a special appearance" means only one may be filed.”
PMIT REI 2021-A LLC v. Bell (2024)
— 735 ILCS 5/2-301(c) — 6 cases
Cameron v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. (1998)
“" 735 ILCS 5/2-301(a), (b) (West 1994). Plaintiffs argue that "a special appearance" means only one may be filed.”
Greenview Gardens v. Wereko (2022)
In re Detention of Lieberman (2005)
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.
|