ILCS » Chapter 735 · Act 5
Illinois Compiled Statutes

735 ILCS 5/3-111 (2026)

Powers of circuit court

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IL-ILGAilga.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(735 ILCS 5/3-111) (from Ch. 110, par. 3-111)
    Sec. 3-111. Powers of circuit court.
    (a) The Circuit Court has power:
        (1) with or without requiring bond (except if
    
otherwise provided in the particular statute under authority of which the administrative decision was entered), and before or after answer filed, upon notice to the agency and good cause shown, to stay the decision of the administrative agency in whole or in part pending the final disposition of the case. For the purpose of this subsection, "good cause" requires the applicant to show (i) that an immediate stay is required in order to preserve the status quo without endangering the public, (ii) that it is not contrary to public policy, and (iii) that there exists a reasonable likelihood of success on the merits;
        (2) to make any order that it deems proper for the
    
amendment, completion or filing of the record of proceedings of the administrative agency;
        (3) to allow substitution of parties by reason of
    
marriage, death, bankruptcy, assignment or other cause;
        (4) to dismiss parties, to correct misnomers,
    
including any erroneous identification of the administrative agency that was made in good faith, to realign parties, or to join agencies or parties;
        (5) to affirm or reverse the decision in whole or in
    
part;
        (6) where a hearing has been held by the agency, to
    
reverse and remand the decision in whole or in part, and, in that case, to state the questions requiring further hearing or proceedings and to give such other instructions as may be proper;
        (7) where a hearing has been held by the agency, to
    
remand for the purpose of taking additional evidence when from the state of the record of the administrative agency or otherwise it shall appear that such action is just. However, no remandment shall be made on the ground of newly discovered evidence unless it appears to the satisfaction of the court that such evidence has in fact been discovered subsequent to the termination of the proceedings before the administrative agency and that it could not by the exercise of reasonable diligence have been obtained at such proceedings; and that such evidence is material to the issues and is not cumulative;
        (8) in case of affirmance or partial affirmance of an
    
administrative decision which requires the payment of money, to enter judgment for the amount justified by the record and for costs, which judgment may be enforced as other judgments for the recovery of money;
        (9) when the particular statute under authority of
    
which the administrative decision was entered requires the plaintiff to file a satisfactory bond and provides for the dismissal of the action for the plaintiff's failure to comply with this requirement unless the court is authorized by the particular statute to enter, and does enter, an order imposing a lien upon the plaintiff's property, to take such proofs and to enter such orders as may be appropriate to carry out the provisions of the particular statute. However, the court shall not approve the bond, nor enter an order for the lien, in any amount which is less than that prescribed by the particular statute under authority of which the administrative decision was entered if the statute provides what the minimum amount of the bond or lien shall be or provides how said minimum amount shall be determined. No such bond shall be approved by the court without notice to, and an opportunity to be heard thereon by, the administrative agency affected. The lien, created by the entry of a court order in lieu of a bond, shall not apply to property exempted from the lien by the particular statute under authority of which the administrative decision was entered. The lien shall not be effective against real property whose title is registered under the provisions of the Registered Titles (Torrens) Act until the provisions of Section 85 of that Act are complied with.
    (b) Technical errors in the proceedings before the administrative agency or its failure to observe the technical rules of evidence shall not constitute grounds for the reversal of the administrative decision unless it appears to the court that such error or failure materially affected the rights of any party and resulted in substantial injustice to him or her.
    (c) On motion of either party, the circuit court shall make findings of fact or state the propositions of law upon which its judgment is based.
    (d) The changes to this Section made by Public Act 95-831 apply to all actions filed on or after August 21, 2007 (the effective date of Public Act 95-831). The changes made by this amendatory Act of the 100th General Assembly apply to all actions filed on or after the effective date of this amendatory Act of the 100th General Assembly.
(Source: P.A. 100-212, eff. 8-18-17.)

    
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 74 cases (18 in the last 5 years), 1995–2026 · leading case: McLean v. Dep't of Revenue, 704 N.E.2d 352 (Ill. 1998).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
McLean v. Dep't of Revenue, 704 N.E.2d 352 (Ill. 1998). · cites it 4× “I The Department first contends that the circuit court erred in declaring unconstitutional the "bond or lien" provisions of the Act (35 ILCS 120/12 (West 1996)) and the Administrative Review Law (735 ILCS 5/3-111(a)(9) (West 1996)). The relevant provision under the…”
Danigeles v. Illinois Dep't of Fin. & Prof'l Reg., 2015 IL App (1st) 142622 (Ill. App. Ct. 2015). · cites it 2× “' " Kafin, 2012 IL App (1st) 111875, ¶ 38 (quoting 735 ILCS 5/3-111(b) (West 2008) and Matos v.”
Antlitz v. Forest Preserve Dist., 2020 IL App (1st) 191415 (Ill. App. Ct. 2020). · cites it 3× “¶ 42 In addition to a simple affirmance or reversal, the Administrative Review Law permits a circuit court to remand the matter back to the administrative agency with “questions requiring further hearing or proceedings” (735 ILCS 5/3-111(a)(6) (West 2018)) or “for the purpose of…”
Parikh v. Div. of Prof'l Reg. of the Dep't of Fin. & Prof'l Reg., 2012 IL App (1st) 121226 (Ill. App. Ct. 2012). · cites it 2× “For the purpose of this subsection, ‘good cause’ requires the applicant to show (i) that an immediate stay is required in order to preserve the status quo without endangering the public, (ii) that it is not contrary to public policy, and (iii) that there exists a reasonable…”
Kafin v. Div. of Prof'l Reg. of the Dep't of Fin. & Prof'l Reg., 2012 IL App (1st) 111875 (Ill. App. Ct. 2012). · cites it 2× “” 735 ILCS 5/3-111(b) (West 2008); Matos v.”
Williams v. Dep't of Human Servs. Div. of Rehab. Servs., 2019 IL App (1st) 181517 (Ill. App. Ct. 2020). “” See 735 ILCS 5/3-101 (West 2016) (defining terms such as “ ‘Administrative agency’ ” and other terms that are used in an administrative review action); 735 ILCS 5/3-111 (West 2016) (setting out powers of the circuit court).”
Cunningham v. Ret. Bd. Firemen's Ann., 907 N.E.2d 463 (Ill. App. Ct. 2009). · cites it 3× “Accordingly, we find that section 3-104 of the Administrative Review Law conferred jurisdiction on the circuit court and the power to retain jurisdiction until there was a final disposition (735 ILCS 5/3-104 (West 2006)), and that section 3-111 of the Administrative Review Law…”
Gruwell v. Dep't of Fin. & Prof'l Reg., 943 N.E.2d 658 (Ill. App. Ct. 2010). “" 735 ILCS 5/3-111(a)(8) (West 2008). In turn, the circuit court's decision "is reviewable by appeal as in other civil cases.”
Cent. Nursing Realty, LLC v. Illinois Prop. Tax Appeal Bd., 2020 IL App (1st) 180994 (Ill. App. Ct. 2020). “3d 988, 993 (1993) (an “appellate court may reverse an administrative ruling only if there is error which prejudiced a party in the proceeding”); 735 ILCS 5/3-111(b) (West 2018) (“Technical errors in the proceedings before the administrative agency or its failure to observe the…”
West Loop Assocs., LLC v. Prop. Tax Appeal Bd., 2017 IL App (1st) 151998 (Ill. App. Ct. 2017). · cites it 3× “735 ILCS 5/3-111(b) (West 2010). Reversal is unwarranted “unless it appears to the court that such error or failure materially affected the rights of any party and resulted in substantial injustice to him or her.”
Pesoli v. Dep't of Emp. Sec., 2012 IL App (1st) 111835 (Ill. App. Ct. 2012). “” 735 ILCS 5/3-111(b) (West 2008). Moreover, “[i]t is well established that when hearsay evidence is admitted without an objection, it is to be considered and given its natural probative effect.”
FLM Enter., LLC v. Peoria Cnty. Zoning Bd. of Appeals, 2020 IL App (3d) 180634 (Ill. App. Ct. 2020). “See 735 ILCS 5/3-111(a)(6) (West 2018) (where a hearing has been held by the agency, reviewing court has authority to remand the decision and give instructions).”
Show all 74 citing cases →
— 735 ILCS 5/3-111(7) — 1 case
Klomann v. Ill. Mun. Ret. Fund (Ill. App. Ct. 1996).
— 735 ILCS 5/3-111(a) — 2 cases
McRay v. Ross (N.D. Ill. 2018).
Jefferson v. Chicago Hous. Auth., 2026 IL App (1st) 260279 (Ill. App. Ct. 2026).
— 735 ILCS 5/3-111(a)(1) — 7 cases
Parikh v. Div. of Prof'l Reg. of the Dep't of Fin. & Prof'l Reg., 2012 IL App (1st) 121226 (Ill. App. Ct. 2012). “For the purpose of this subsection, ‘good cause’ requires the applicant to show (i) that an immediate stay is required in order to preserve the status quo without endangering the public, (ii) that it is not contrary to public policy, and (iii) that there exists a reasonable…”
West Bend Mut. Ins. Co. v. TRRS Corp., 2019 IL App (2d) 180934 (Ill. App. Ct. 2020).
Health All. Med. Plans v. Dep't of Healthcare & Fam. Servs., 2011 IL App (4th) 110495 (Ill. App. Ct. 2011).
Masood v. Div. of Prof'l Reg., 2022 IL App (1st) 211530-U (Ill. App. Ct. 2022).
Metz v. Dep't of Prof'l Reg. (Ill. App. Ct. 2002).
— 735 ILCS 5/3-111(a)(1)(i) — 2 cases
Health All. Med. Plans v. Dep't of Healthcare & Fam. Servs., 2011 IL App (4th) 110495 (Ill. App. Ct. 2011).
Health All. Med. Plans v. Dhfs, 957 N.E.2d 447 (Ill. App. Ct. 2011).
— 735 ILCS 5/3-111(a)(1)(ii) — 2 cases
Health All. Med. Plans v. Dep't of Healthcare & Fam. Servs., 2011 IL App (4th) 110495 (Ill. App. Ct. 2011).
Health All. Med. Plans v. Dhfs, 957 N.E.2d 447 (Ill. App. Ct. 2011).
— 735 ILCS 5/3-111(a)(1)(iii) — 2 cases
Health All. Med. Plans v. Dep't of Healthcare & Fam. Servs., 2011 IL App (4th) 110495 (Ill. App. Ct. 2011).
Health All. Med. Plans v. Dhfs, 957 N.E.2d 447 (Ill. App. Ct. 2011).
— 735 ILCS 5/3-111(a)(2) — 1 case
Daka v. Dir. of Emp. Sec., 2025 IL App (2d) 240294 (Ill. App. Ct. 2025).
— 735 ILCS 5/3-111(a)(5) — 6 cases
AT&T Teleholdings, Inc. v. Dep't of Revenue, 2012 IL App (1st) 113053 (Ill. App. Ct. 2012).
Beary Landscaping, I v. Joe Costiga, 667 F.3d 947 (7th Cir. 2012).
Thompson v. Illinois State Bd. of Elections, 945 N.E.2d 625 (Ill. App. Ct. 2011).
McRay v. Ross (N.D. Ill. 2018).
Hamedani v. Bd. of Educ., 556 F. App'x 511 (7th Cir. 2014).
— 735 ILCS 5/3-111(a)(6) — 6 cases
Antlitz v. Forest Preserve Dist., 2020 IL App (1st) 191415 (Ill. App. Ct. 2020). “¶ 42 In addition to a simple affirmance or reversal, the Administrative Review Law permits a circuit court to remand the matter back to the administrative agency with “questions requiring further hearing or proceedings” (735 ILCS 5/3-111(a)(6) (West 2018)) or “for the purpose of…”
FLM Enter., LLC v. Peoria Cnty. Zoning Bd. of Appeals, 2020 IL App (3d) 180634 (Ill. App. Ct. 2020). “See 735 ILCS 5/3-111(a)(6) (West 2018) (where a hearing has been held by the agency, reviewing court has authority to remand the decision and give instructions).”
Cunningham v. Ret. Bd. Firemen's Ann., 907 N.E.2d 463 (Ill. App. Ct. 2009). “Accordingly, we find that section 3-104 of the Administrative Review Law conferred jurisdiction on the circuit court and the power to retain jurisdiction until there was a final disposition (735 ILCS 5/3-104 (West 2006)), and that section 3-111 of the Administrative Review Law…”
Lamm v. McRaith, 2012 IL App (1st) 112123 (Ill. App. Ct. 2012).
Vill. of Schaumburg v. Vill. of Schaumburg Firefighters' Pension Fund, 2025 IL App (1st) 241764 (Ill. App. Ct. 2025).
— 735 ILCS 5/3-111(a)(7) — 11 cases
Antlitz v. Forest Preserve Dist., 2020 IL App (1st) 191415 (Ill. App. Ct. 2020). “¶ 42 In addition to a simple affirmance or reversal, the Administrative Review Law permits a circuit court to remand the matter back to the administrative agency with “questions requiring further hearing or proceedings” (735 ILCS 5/3-111(a)(6) (West 2018)) or “for the purpose of…”
Baker v. Illinois Dep't of Emp. Sec., 2014 IL App (1st) 123669 (Ill. App. Ct. 2014).
Cunningham v. Ret. Bd. Firemen's Ann., 907 N.E.2d 463 (Ill. App. Ct. 2009). “Accordingly, we find that section 3-104 of the Administrative Review Law conferred jurisdiction on the circuit court and the power to retain jurisdiction until there was a final disposition (735 ILCS 5/3-104 (West 2006)), and that section 3-111 of the Administrative Review Law…”
Petersen v. Bd. of Trs. of the Oak Lawn Police Pension Fund, 2025 IL App (1st) 240591-U (Ill. App. Ct. 2025).
Williams v. Dep't of Human Servs. Div. of Rehab. Servs., 2022 IL App (1st) 211247-U (Ill. App. Ct. 2022).
— 735 ILCS 5/3-111(a)(7)(1996) — 1 case
Krain v. Illinois Dept. of Prof'l Reg. (Ill. App. Ct. 1998).
— 735 ILCS 5/3-111(a)(8) — 6 cases
Gruwell v. Dep't of Fin. & Prof'l Reg., 943 N.E.2d 658 (Ill. App. Ct. 2010). “" 735 ILCS 5/3-111(a)(8) (West 2008). In turn, the circuit court's decision "is reviewable by appeal as in other civil cases.”
Shields v. State Employees Ret. Sys., 844 N.E.2d 438 (Ill. App. Ct. 2006).
Dobbs Tire & Auto v. Illinois Workers' Comp. Comm'n, 2018 IL App (5th) 160297WC (Ill. App. Ct. 2018).
Gruwell v. The Illinois Dep't of Fin. & Prof'l Reg. (Ill. App. Ct. 2010).
Illinois Health Maint. Guar. Ass'n v. Shapo (Ill. App. Ct. 2005).
— 735 ILCS 5/3-111(a)(9) — 2 cases
McLean v. Dep't of Revenue, 704 N.E.2d 352 (Ill. 1998). “I The Department first contends that the circuit court erred in declaring unconstitutional the "bond or lien" provisions of the Act (35 ILCS 120/12 (West 1996)) and the Administrative Review Law (735 ILCS 5/3-111(a)(9) (West 1996)). The relevant provision under the…”
McLean v. Dep't of Revenue (Ill. App. Ct. 2001).
— 735 ILCS 5/3-111(b) — 27 cases
Danigeles v. Illinois Dep't of Fin. & Prof'l Reg., 2015 IL App (1st) 142622 (Ill. App. Ct. 2015). “' " Kafin, 2012 IL App (1st) 111875, ¶ 38 (quoting 735 ILCS 5/3-111(b) (West 2008) and Matos v.”
Kafin v. Div. of Prof'l Reg. of the Dep't of Fin. & Prof'l Reg., 2012 IL App (1st) 111875 (Ill. App. Ct. 2012). “” 735 ILCS 5/3-111(b) (West 2008); Matos v.”
Cent. Nursing Realty, LLC v. Illinois Prop. Tax Appeal Bd., 2020 IL App (1st) 180994 (Ill. App. Ct. 2020). “3d 988, 993 (1993) (an “appellate court may reverse an administrative ruling only if there is error which prejudiced a party in the proceeding”); 735 ILCS 5/3-111(b) (West 2018) (“Technical errors in the proceedings before the administrative agency or its failure to observe the…”
West Loop Assocs., LLC v. Prop. Tax Appeal Bd., 2017 IL App (1st) 151998 (Ill. App. Ct. 2017). “735 ILCS 5/3-111(b) (West 2010). Reversal is unwarranted “unless it appears to the court that such error or failure materially affected the rights of any party and resulted in substantial injustice to him or her.”
Pesoli v. Dep't of Emp. Sec., 2012 IL App (1st) 111835 (Ill. App. Ct. 2012). “” 735 ILCS 5/3-111(b) (West 2008). Moreover, “[i]t is well established that when hearsay evidence is admitted without an objection, it is to be considered and given its natural probative effect.”
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.