ILCS » Chapter 740 · Act 35
Illinois Compiled Statutes

740 ILCS 35/0.01 (2026)

Short title

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IL-ILGAilga.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(740 ILCS 35/0.01) (from Ch. 29, par. 60.90)
    Sec. 0.01. Short title. This Act may be cited as the Construction Contract Indemnification for Negligence Act.
(Source: P.A. 86-1324.)

    
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 19 cases, 1994–2018 · leading case: Braye v. Archer-Daniels-Midland Co., 676 N.E.2d 1295 (Ill. 1997).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Braye v. Archer-Daniels-Midland Co., 676 N.E.2d 1295 (Ill. 1997). · cites it 3× “We also are asked to determine whether the alleged contractual language at issue in the case at bar operates as a waiver of the Kotecki cap or whether it is void for being in violation of the Construction Contract Indemnification for Negligence Act (740 ILCS 35/0.01 et seq.…”
Virginia Sur. Co. v. N. Ins., 866 N.E.2d 149 (Ill. 2007). “We note that such contracts are governed by the Illinois Construction Contract Indemnification for Negligence Act (Anti-Indemnification Act) (740 ILCS 35/0.01 et seq. (West 2000)), which voids any agreement in a construction contract to indemnify or hold harmless a person from…”
Liccardi v. Stolt Terminals, Inc., 687 N.E.2d 968 (Ill. 1997). · cites it 2× “2d 155 (1991), and (2) whether the contractual provisions in this case do waive the Kotecki cap or are, instead, void and unenforceable under the Construction Contract Indemnification for Negligence Act (740 ILCS 35/0.01 et seq. (West 1994)) on the grounds that they require the…”
Buenz v. Frontline Transp. Co., 882 N.E.2d 525 (Ill. 2008). “740 ILCS 35/0.01 et seq. (West 2006). As such, if Westinghouse, Tatar, and Zadak were heard today, there would be no argument concerning whether the language in each case was unequivocal enough to indemnify an indemnitee for that indemnitee’s own negligence because the act…”
Am. Fam. Mut. Ins. v. Fisher Dev., Inc., 909 N.E.2d 274 (Ill. App. Ct. 2009). “The Construction Contract Indemnification for Negligence Act (740 ILCS 35/0.01 et seq. (West 2000)) (Anti-Indemnification Act) prohibits the Gap in the construction contract from shifting responsibility for its own negligence to FDI.”
Transcontinental Ins. v. Nat'l Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, 662 N.E.2d 500 (Ill. App. Ct. 1996). “61 to 63 (now the Construction Contract Indemnification for Negligence Act (740 ILCS 35/0.01 et seq. (West 1992)))) (Indemnification Act).”
Ne. Illinois Reg'l Commuter R.R. v. Kiewit W. Co., 396 F. Supp. 2d 913 (N.D. Ill. 2005). · cites it 2× “This indemnification is not intended to violate the provisions of 740 ILCS 35/0.01 et seq., ... nor is it intended to be an indemnification of Me-tra’s own negligence or the negligence of Metra’s employees.”
Mondschein v. Power Constr. Co., 936 N.E.2d 1101 (Ill. App. Ct. 2010). · cites it 2× “On July 31, 2009, the circuit court made the following findings: (1) Joliet Steel waived its right to limit its liability to workers’ compensation; (2) its waiver did not violate the Illinois Construction Contract Indemnification for Negligence Act (Anti-Indemnification Act)…”
USX Corp. v. Liberty Mut. Ins., 645 N.E.2d 396 (Ill. App. Ct. 1994). “It urges that even if we find that Turner is correct in its assertion that the Senneway letter contained a promise to cover Turner under USX’s self-insurance program, a contention disputed by USX, that promise would be void and unenforceable under the provisions of the…”
Jandrisits v. Vill. of River Grove, 669 N.E.2d 1166 (Ill. App. Ct. 1996). “740 ILCS 35/0.01 et seq. (West 1994). The Village of River Grove (Village) appeals from an order granting summary judgment to Triggi Construction, Inc.”
Ioerger v. Halverson Const. Co., Inc., 878 N.E.2d 147 (Ill. App. Ct. 2007). · cites it 2× “Even if either one of the defendants or both are not entitled to the protection of the exclusive remedy provision, there are possibly other potential issues.”
Braye v. Archer-Daniels-Midland Co., 659 N.E.2d 430 (Ill. App. Ct. 1995). “The trial court denied the motion, finding the contract was unenforceable under the Construction Contract Indemnification for Negligence Act (Indemnification Act) (740 ILCS 35/0.01 et seq. (West 1994)). On March 29, 1995, ADM filed a new motion to amend its third-party…”
Show all 19 citing cases →
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.