ILCS » Chapter 735 · Act 5
Illinois Compiled Statutes

735 ILCS 5/2-404 (2026)

Joinder of plaintiffs

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IL-ILGAilga.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(735 ILCS 5/2-404) (from Ch. 110, par. 2-404)
    Sec. 2-404. Joinder of plaintiffs. All persons may join in one action as plaintiffs, in whom any right to relief in respect of or arising out of the same transaction or series of transactions is alleged to exist, whether jointly, severally or in the alternative, whenever if those persons had brought separate actions any common question of law or fact would arise. If upon the application of any party it shall appear that joinder may embarrass or delay the trial of the action, the court may order separate trials or enter any other order that may be expedient. Judgment may be entered for any one or more of the plaintiffs who may be found to be entitled to relief, for the relief to which he or she or they may be entitled.
    If any one who is a necessary plaintiff, counterclaimant or third-party plaintiff declines to join, he or she may be made a defendant, cross defendant or third-party defendant, as the case may be, the reason therefor being stated in the complaint, counterclaim or third-party complaint.
(Source: P.A. 83-707.)

    
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2001–2022 · leading case: Madison Two Assocs. v. Pappas, 884 N.E.2d 142 (Ill. 2008).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Madison Two Assocs. v. Pappas, 884 N.E.2d 142 (Ill. 2008). · cites it 4× “It provides that joinder of additional parties as plaintiffs in the tax objection proceeding "shall be permitted to the same extent permitted by law in any personal action pending in the court and shall be in accordance with Section 2-404 of the Code of Civil Procedure [735 ILCS…”
Sundance Homes, Inc. v. Cnty. of Du Page, 746 N.E.2d 254 (Ill. 2001). “As the county points out, the Code of Civil Procedure provides the means by which additional parties may be joined in a pending action (735 ILCS 5/2-404 (West 1998)), those interested in the outcome may intervene (735 ILCS 5/2-408 (West 1998)), and a single party may represent a…”
Doermer v. Oxford Fin. Grp., Ltd., 884 F.3d 643 (7th Cir. 2018). “To the extent that Richard's argument involves a capacity issue rather than a question of party joinder, we note that there is no such thing as an "involuntary plaintiff" in the forum state, Illinois.”
Aussieker v. City of Bloomington, 822 N.E.2d 927 (Ill. App. Ct. 2005). “If upon the application of any party it shall appear that joinder may embarrass or delay the trial of the action, the court may order separate trials or enter any other order that may be expedient. Judgment may be entered for any one or more of the plaintiffs who may be found to…”
Cnty. of Peoria v. Couture, 2022 IL App (3d) 210091 (Ill. App. Ct. 2022). “7, 2011) (providing that “[t]he charging document may be amended at any time, before or after judgment, to conform the pleadings to the proofs on just and reasonable terms”); see also 735 ILCS 5/2-404 (West 2020) (providing that “[a]ll persons may join in one action as…”
Pekin Ins. Co. v. Rada Dev., LLC, 2014 IL App (1st) 133947 (Ill. App. Ct. 2014). “For instance, a party who declines to join a lawsuit may be made a defendant (735 ILCS 5/2-404 (West 2012)); a party deemed necessary to a complete determination of any question raised in controversy may be joined (735 ILCS 5/2-405(a) (West 2012)); and, the trial court may, sua…”
Aussieker v. City of Bloomington (Ill. App. Ct. 2005). “If upon the application of any party it shall appear that joinder may embarrass or delay the trial of the action, the court may order separate trials or enter any other order that may be expedient. Judgment may be entered for any one or more of the plaintiffs who may be found to…”
Prime Leasing, Inc. v. Kendig (Ill. App. Ct. 2002). “" 735 ILCS 5/2-404 (West 2000). Section 2-407 of the Illinois Code of Civil Procedure provides as follows: "No action shall be dismissed for misjoinder of parties, or dismissed for nonjoinder of necessary parties without first affording reasonable opportunity to add them as…”
Mount Mansfield Ins. Grp. v. Am. Int'l Grp. (Ill. App. Ct. 2007). “735 ILCS 5/2-404 (West 2004). 10 1-06-0974 Accordingly, where Mount Mansfield was not a party or in privity with the parties in the Aldworth action, its claims are not barred by the doctrine of res judicata.”
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.