Illinois Compiled Statutes

735 ILCS 5/3-101 (2026)

Definitions

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IL-ILGAilga.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(735 ILCS 5/3-101) (from Ch. 110, par. 3-101)
    Sec. 3-101. Definitions. For the purpose of this Act:
    "Administrative agency" means a person, body of persons, group, officer, board, bureau, commission or department (other than a court or judge) of the State, or of any political subdivision of the State or municipal corporation in the State, having power under law to make administrative decisions.
    "Administrative decision" or "decision" means any decision, order or determination of any administrative agency rendered in a particular case, which affects the legal rights, duties or privileges of parties and which terminates the proceedings before the administrative agency. In all cases in which a statute or a rule of the administrative agency requires or permits an application for a rehearing or other method of administrative review to be filed within a specified time (as distinguished from a statute which permits the application for rehearing or administrative review to be filed at any time before judgment by the administrative agency against the applicant or within a specified time after the entry of such judgment), and an application for such rehearing or review is made, no administrative decision of such agency shall be final as to the party applying therefor until such rehearing or review is had or denied. However, if the particular statute permits an application for rehearing or other method of administrative review to be filed with the administrative agency for an indefinite period of time after the administrative decision has been rendered (such as permitting such application to be filed at any time before judgment by the administrative agency against the applicant or within a specified time after the entry of such judgment), then the authorization for the filing of such application for rehearing or review shall not postpone the time when the administrative decision as to which such application shall be filed would otherwise become final, but the filing of the application for rehearing or review with the administrative agency in this type of case shall constitute the commencement of a new proceeding before such agency, and the decision rendered in order to dispose of such rehearing or other review proceeding shall constitute a new and independent administrative decision. If such new and independent decision consists merely of the denial of the application for rehearing or other method of administrative review, the record upon judicial review of such decision shall be limited to the application for rehearing or other review and the order or decision denying such application and shall not include the record of proceedings had before the rendering of the administrative decision as to which the application for rehearing or other administrative review shall have been filed unless the suit for judicial review is commenced within the time in which it would be authorized by this Act to have been commenced if no application for rehearing or other method of administrative review had been filed. On the other hand, if the rehearing or other administrative review is granted by the administrative agency, then the record on judicial review of the resulting administrative decision rendered pursuant to the rehearing or other administrative review may consist not only of the record of proceedings had before the administrative agency in such rehearing or other administrative review proceeding, but also of the record of proceedings had before such administrative agency prior to its rendering of the administrative decision as to which the rehearing or other administrative review shall have been granted. The term "administrative decision" or "decision" does not mean or include rules, regulations, standards, or statements of policy of general application issued by an administrative agency to implement, interpret, or make specific the legislation enforced or administered by it unless such a rule, regulation, standard or statement of policy is involved in a proceeding before the agency and its applicability or validity is in issue in such proceeding, nor does it mean or include regulations concerning the internal management of the agency not affecting private rights or interests.
(Source: P.A. 92-651, eff. 7-11-02.)

    
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 764 cases (178 in the last 5 years), 1993–2026 · leading case: Ultsch v. Illinois Mun. Ret. Fund, 874 N.E.2d 1 (Ill. 2007).
Ultsch v. Illinois Mun. Ret. Fund, 874 N.E.2d 1 (Ill. 2007). · cites it 5× “Thus, according to IMRF, the plaintiff was properly denied leave to amend the complaint.”
Merritt v. The Dep't of State Police, 2016 IL App (4th) 150661 (Ill. App. Ct. 2016). · cites it 4× “Section 3-101 of the Administrative Review Law defines "administrative decision" as follows: "[A]ny decision, order or determination of any administrative agency rendered in a particular case, which affects the legal rights, duties or privileges of parties and which terminates…”
Bd. of Educ. of the City of Chicago v. Moore, 2021 IL 125785 (Ill. 2021). · cites it 2× “§ 34-85(a)(8) (teacher may seek judicial review of a board’s decision pursuant to the Administrative Review Law (735 ILCS 5/3-101 et seq. (West 2016)), except review must be initiated in Illinois Appellate Court, First District).”
Provena Covenant Med. Ctr. v. Dep't of Revenue, 925 N.E.2d 1131 (Ill. 2010). · cites it 2× “The Director further concluded that the property did not qualify for a religious exemption under section 15-40 of the Property Tax Code (35 ILCS 200/15-40 (West 2002)). [8] The circuit court of Sangamon County disagreed with the Director on both counts.”
Lyon v. Dep't of Child. & Fam. Servs., 807 N.E.2d 423 (Ill. 2004). · cites it 2× “Lyon sought reversal of the indicated report and expungement of the report from the central register through the administrative appellate process established by the Act, arguing that procedural violations by the Department violated his due process rights and that the indicated…”
Casimir Stachowski v. Town of Cicero, 425 F.3d 1075 (7th Cir. 2005). · cites it 3× “2003); 735 ILCS 5/3-101 et seq. Rather, he contends that he was held in administrative limbo — unable to collect pay during his suspension yet unable to obtain, review of any adverse termination decision because no adverse decision had been made.”
Collinsville Cmty. Unit Sch. Dist. No. 10 v. Reg'l Bd. of Sch. Trs., 843 N.E.2d 273 (Ill. 2006). · cites it 2× “OPINION Chief Justice THOMAS delivered the judgment of the court, with opinion: This appeal involves the joinder requirements of the Administrative Review Law (Review Law) (735 ILCS 5/3-101 et seq. (West 2000)). At issue is whether the circuit court erred in allowing the…”
De Jesus v. Policemen's Annuity & Benefit Fund, 2019 IL App (1st) 190486 (Ill. App. Ct. 2020). · cites it 3× “On defendant’s motion, the circuit court dismissed plaintiffs’ complaint, finding that they had failed to timely initiate administrative review of their allegedly miscalculated disability benefits pursuant to the procedures set forth in the Administrative Review Law (735 ILCS…”
Marconi v. Chicago Heights Police Pension Bd., 870 N.E.2d 273 (Ill. 2007). “Section 3-148 of the Pension Code (40 ILCS 5/3-148 (West 2002)) provides that judicial review of the decision of the Board is governed by the Administrative Review Law (735 ILCS 5/3-101 et seq. (West 2002)). See also AFM Messenger Service, Inc.”
Nichols v. S. Illinois Univ.-Edwardsville, 510 F.3d 772 (7th Cir. 2007). “The Merit Board's discharge decisions are subject to review by Illinois circuit and appellate courts pursuant to the Illinois Administrative Review Act, 735 ILCS 5/3-101 et seq. 5 . Chief Harrison testified he initially rejected the suggestion to assign black officers to the…”
The City of Kankakee v. Dep't of Revenue, 2013 IL App (3d) 120599 (Ill. App. Ct. 2013). · cites it 3× “Kankakee argued that the trial court had jurisdiction under the Review Act (735 ILCS 5/3-101 et seq. (West 2010)). It also argued, in part, that the Department’s adjustment was time-barred based on the six-month limitations period per section 6z-18 of the State Finance Act (30…”
Williams v. Dep't of Human Servs. Div. of Rehab. Servs., 2019 IL App (1st) 181517 (Ill. App. Ct. 2020). · cites it 2× “The agency’s final administrative decision was subject to judicial review first in the circuit court pursuant to a common law writ of certiorari because the state act that governs vocational rehabilitation services does not adopt the Administrative Review Law (Review Law) (735…”
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.