ILCS » Chapter 735 · Act 5
Illinois Compiled Statutes

735 ILCS 5/2-701 (2026)

Declaratory judgments

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IL-ILGAilga.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(735 ILCS 5/2-701) (from Ch. 110, par. 2-701)
    Sec. 2-701. Declaratory judgments. (a) No action or proceeding is open to objection on the ground that a merely declaratory judgment or order is sought thereby. The court may, in cases of actual controversy, make binding declarations of rights, having the force of final judgments, whether or not any consequential relief is or could be claimed, including the determination, at the instance of anyone interested in the controversy, of the construction of any statute, municipal ordinance, or other governmental regulation, or of any deed, will, contract or other written instrument, and a declaration of the rights of the parties interested. The foregoing enumeration does not exclude other cases of actual controversy. The court shall refuse to enter a declaratory judgment or order, if it appears that the judgment or order, would not terminate the controversy or some part thereof, giving rise to the proceeding. In no event shall the court entertain any action or proceeding for a declaratory judgment or order involving any political question where the defendant is a State officer whose election is provided for by the Constitution; however, nothing herein shall prevent the court from entertaining any such action or proceeding for a declaratory judgment or order if such question also involves a constitutional convention or the construction of a statute involving a constitutional convention.
    (b) Declarations of rights, as herein provided for, may be obtained by means of a pleading seeking that relief alone, or as incident to or part of a complaint, counterclaim or other pleading seeking other relief as well, and if a declaration of rights is the only relief asked, the case may be set for early hearing as in the case of a motion.
    (c) If further relief based upon a declaration of right becomes necessary or proper after the declaration has been made, application may be made by petition to any court having jurisdiction for an order directed to any party or parties whose rights have been determined by the declaration to show cause why the further relief should not be granted forthwith, upon reasonable notice prescribed by the court in its order.
    (d) If a proceeding under this Section involves the determination of issues of fact triable by a jury, they shall be tried and determined in the same manner as issues of fact are tried and determined in other civil actions in the court in which the proceeding is pending.
    (e) Unless the parties agree by stipulation as to the allowance thereof, costs in proceedings authorized by this Section shall be allowed in accordance with rules. In the absence of rules the practice in other civil actions shall be followed if applicable, and if not applicable, the costs may be taxed as to the court seems just.
(Source: P.A. 82-280.)

    
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 210 cases (64 in the last 5 years), 1993–2026 · leading case: In re Marriage of Heinrich, 2014 IL App (2d) 121333 (Ill. App. Ct. 2014).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
In re Marriage of Heinrich, 2014 IL App (2d) 121333 (Ill. App. Ct. 2014). · cites it 6× “¶ 13 On March 3, 2011, respondent moved for a declaratory judgment (735 ILCS 5/2-701 (West 2010)), seeking a general determination of the parties’ rights under the premarital agreement and arguing that there was an actual controversy as to the validity and enforceability of the…”
In Re Marriage of Rife, 878 N.E.2d 775 (Ill. App. Ct. 2007). · cites it 5× “Rife appeals an order denying his petition under section 2-701 of the Code of Civil Procedure, commonly referred to as the Declaratory Judgment Act (Act) (735 ILCS 5/2-701 (West 2004)). On appeal, respondent argues that the trial court erred in holding that petitioner Maureen E.”
Rowe v. Raoul, 2023 IL 129248 (Ill. 2023). “” 735 ILCS 5/2-701(a) (West 2020). ¶ 73 Based on this statutory language, we have held that there are essentially two main requirements for standing to bring an action for declaratory relief: (1) the case must present “a concrete dispute admitting of an immediate and definitive…”
Alternate Fuels, Inc. v. Dir. of Illinois Env't Prot. Agency, 830 N.E.2d 444 (Ill. 2005). · cites it 3× “735 ILCS 5/2-701 (West 1998). The Agency moved to dismiss, arguing that there was no actual controversy ripe for determination because AFI failed to exhaust all administrative remedies.”
Gaffney v. Bd. of Trs. of the Orland Fire Prot. Dist., 2012 IL 110012 (Ill. 2012). · cites it 2× “735 ILCS 5/2-701(a) (West 2006). Here, the District made a final decision objecting to Gaffney’s demand for section 10 benefits.”
Cahokia Unit Sch. Dist. No. 187 v. Pritzker, 2021 IL 126212 (Ill. 2021). · cites it 2× “This case does not involve an actual controversy between the parties as required to grant declaratory relief (735 ILCS 5/2-701(a) (West 2018)). Accordingly, we affirm the appellate court’s judgment.”
Madison Cnty., Illinois v. Illinois State Bd. of Elections, 2022 IL App (4th) 220169 (Ill. App. Ct. 2022). · cites it 3× “As to the claims for declaratory relief, Madison County and Wiley sought a declaration pursuant to section 2-701 of the Code of Civil Procedure (Civil Code) (735 ILCS 5/2-701 (West 2020)), that section 2f-13 was unconstitutional in that it violated (1) article VI, section 7, of…”
Gaffney v. Orland Fire Prot. Dist., 969 N.E.2d 359 (Ill. 2012). · cites it 3× “The trial court dismissed count I upon defendants' motion and treated count II as a common law writ of certiorari.”
Thompson v. N.J., 2016 IL App (1st) 142918 (Ill. App. Ct. 2016). · cites it 3× “A complaint for a declaratory judgment must meet the requirements of section 2-701 of the Code (735 ILCS 5/2-701 (West 2014)). Essentially, there are two main, general requirements for standing to bring an action for declaratory relief.”
Adkins Energy, LLC v. Delta-T Corp., 806 N.E.2d 1273 (Ill. App. Ct. 2004). · cites it 2× “2d 1216 (2003); see 735 ILCS 5/2-701 (West *1276 2002). For an actual controversy to exist, the case must present a concrete dispute admitting of an immediate and definitive determination of the parties' rights, the resolution of which will aid in the termination of the…”
The Dep't of Fin. & Prof'l Reg. v. Rodriquez, 2012 IL 113706 (Ill. 2013). · cites it 3× “Rodriquez further contends that res judicata does not apply because the claim for fees was unavailable to him until the rule was invalidated.”
Caulkins v. Pritzker, 2023 IL 129453 (Ill. 2023). “735 ILCS 5/2-701(a) (West 2022). “[S]ummary judgment should be granted only where the pleadings, depositions, admissions and affidavits on file, when viewed in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that…”
Show all 210 citing cases →
— 735 ILCS 5/2-701(a) — 67 cases
Rowe v. Raoul, 2023 IL 129248 (Ill. 2023). “” 735 ILCS 5/2-701(a) (West 2020). ¶ 73 Based on this statutory language, we have held that there are essentially two main requirements for standing to bring an action for declaratory relief: (1) the case must present “a concrete dispute admitting of an immediate and definitive…”
Gaffney v. Bd. of Trs. of the Orland Fire Prot. Dist., 2012 IL 110012 (Ill. 2012). “735 ILCS 5/2-701(a) (West 2006). Here, the District made a final decision objecting to Gaffney’s demand for section 10 benefits.”
In Re Marriage of Rife, 878 N.E.2d 775 (Ill. App. Ct. 2007). “Rife appeals an order denying his petition under section 2-701 of the Code of Civil Procedure, commonly referred to as the Declaratory Judgment Act (Act) (735 ILCS 5/2-701 (West 2004)). On appeal, respondent argues that the trial court erred in holding that petitioner Maureen E.”
In re Marriage of Heinrich, 2014 IL App (2d) 121333 (Ill. App. Ct. 2014). “¶ 13 On March 3, 2011, respondent moved for a declaratory judgment (735 ILCS 5/2-701 (West 2010)), seeking a general determination of the parties’ rights under the premarital agreement and arguing that there was an actual controversy as to the validity and enforceability of the…”
Cahokia Unit Sch. Dist. No. 187 v. Pritzker, 2021 IL 126212 (Ill. 2021). “This case does not involve an actual controversy between the parties as required to grant declaratory relief (735 ILCS 5/2-701(a) (West 2018)). Accordingly, we affirm the appellate court’s judgment.”
— 735 ILCS 5/2-701(b) — 12 cases
Vill. of Chatham v. Cnty. of Sangamon, 814 N.E.2d 216 (Ill. App. Ct. 2004).
Fifield v. Premier Dealer Servs., Inc., 2013 IL App (1st) 120327 (Ill. App. Ct. 2013).
Bossman v. Vill. of Riverton, 684 N.E.2d 427 (Ill. App. Ct. 1997).
State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Progressive N. Ins. Co., 2015 IL App (1st) 140447 (Ill. App. Ct. 2015).
State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Progressive N. Ins. Co., 2015 IL App (1st) 140447 (Ill. App. Ct. 2015).
— 735 ILCS 5/2-701(c) — 15 cases
Creation Supply, Inc. v. Selective Ins. Co. of, 51 F.4th 759 (7th Cir. 2022).
Bd. of Educ. v. Fin. Oversight Panel, 811 N.E.2d 692 (Ill. App. Ct. 2004).
Nelson v. Brewer, 2019 IL App (1st) 173143 (Ill. App. Ct. 2019).
Country Mut. Ins. Co. v. Hilltop View, LLC, 2014 IL App (4th) 140007 (Ill. App. Ct. 2015).
Stonegate Ins. Co. v. All City Towing, Inc., 2024 IL App (1st) 221769 (Ill. App. Ct. 2024).
— 735 ILCS 5/2-701(d) — 5 cases
Martin v. Heinold Commodities, Inc., 643 N.E.2d 734 (Ill. 1994).
State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Progressive N. Ins. Co., 2015 IL App (1st) 140447 (Ill. App. Ct. 2015).
State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Bierman, 2022 IL App (5th) 210001-U, 2022 IL App (5th) 210001-U (Ill. App. Ct. 2022).
State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Progressive N. Ins. Co., 2015 IL App (1st) 140447 (Ill. App. Ct. 2015).
Noren v. Metro. Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co. (Ill. App. Ct. 2006).
— 735 ILCS 5/2-701(e) — 4 cases
Doherty v. Country Faire Conversion, LLC, 2020 IL App (1st) 192385 (Ill. App. Ct. 2020).
One Fish Two Fish, LLC v. Struif, 2021 IL App (1st) 191441 (Ill. App. Ct. 2021).
Doherty v. Country Faire Conversion, LLC, 2020 IL App (1st) 192385 (Ill. App. Ct. 2020).
One Fish Two Fish, LLC v. Struif, 2021 IL App (1st) 191441 (Ill. App. Ct. 2021).
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.