ILCS » Chapter 740 · Act 21

740 ILCS 21/60

Process

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IL-ILGAilga.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(740 ILCS 21/60)
    Sec. 60. Process.
    (a) Any action for a stalking no contact order requires that a separate summons be issued and served. The summons shall be in the form prescribed by Supreme Court Rule 101(d), except that it shall require the respondent to answer or appear within 7 days. Attachments to the summons or notice shall include the petition for stalking no contact order and supporting affidavits, if any, and any emergency stalking no contact order that has been issued.
    (b) The summons shall be served by the sheriff or other law enforcement officer at the earliest time and shall take precedence over other summonses except those of a similar emergency nature. Special process servers may be appointed at any time, and their designation shall not affect the responsibilities and authority of the sheriff or other official process servers.
    (c) Service of process on a member of the respondent's household or by publication shall be adequate if: (1) the petitioner has made all reasonable efforts to accomplish actual service of process personally upon the respondent, but the respondent cannot be found to effect such service; and (2) the petitioner files an affidavit or presents sworn testimony as to those efforts.
    (d) A plenary stalking no contact order may be entered by default for the remedy sought in the petition, if the respondent has been served or given notice in accordance with subsection (a) and if the respondent then fails to appear as directed or fails to appear on any subsequent appearance or hearing date agreed to by the parties or set by the court.
    (e) If an order is granted under subsection (c) of Section 95, the court shall immediately file a certified copy of the order with the sheriff or other law enforcement official charged with maintaining Department of State Police records.
(Source: P.A. 101-508, eff. 1-1-20.)

    
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2018–2026 · leading case: People ex rel. Webb v. Wortham
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
People ex rel. Webb v. Wortham (2018) illappct “She relied on section 60 of the Act ( 740 ILCS 21/60 (West 2012) ), which reads: "(a) Any action for a stalking no contact order requires that a separate summons be issued and served.”
People ex rel. Webb v. Wortham (2019) illappct “She relied on section 60 of the Act (740 ILCS 21/60 (West 2012)), which reads: “(a) Any action for a stalking no contact order requires that a separate summons be issued and served.”
Skertich v. Luffman (2026) illappct · cites it 2× “See 740 ILCS 21/60 (West 2024). Respondent has not alleged that he wished to serve pleadings on Petitioner’s attorney but was unable to do so, or that his alleged lack of knowledge as to who was representing Petitioner hindered Respondent’s defense of this case in any way.”
People v. Morrison (2025) illappct “” 740 ILCS 21/60(c) (West 2020). Under Illinois law obstructing service of process occurs when someone “knowingly resists or obstructs the authorized service or execution of any civil or criminal process or order of any court.”
— 740 ILCS 21/60(c) — 1 case
People v. Morrison (2025) illappct “” 740 ILCS 21/60(c) (West 2020). Under Illinois law obstructing service of process occurs when someone “knowingly resists or obstructs the authorized service or execution of any civil or criminal process or order of any court.”
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.