ILCS » Chapter 740 · Act 70
Illinois Compiled Statutes

740 ILCS 70/3 (2026)

No farm or any of its appurtenances shall be or become a private or public nuisance because of any changed conditions in the surrounding area occurring after the farm has been in operation for more than one year, when such farm was not a nuisance at the time it began operation, provided, that the provisions of this Section shall not apply whenever a nuisance results from the negligent or improper operation of any farm or its appurtenances

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IL-ILGAilga.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(740 ILCS 70/3) (from Ch. 5, par. 1103)
    Sec. 3. No farm or any of its appurtenances shall be or become a private or public nuisance because of any changed conditions in the surrounding area occurring after the farm has been in operation for more than one year, when such farm was not a nuisance at the time it began operation, provided, that the provisions of this Section shall not apply whenever a nuisance results from the negligent or improper operation of any farm or its appurtenances.
(Source: P.A. 82-509.)

    
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10 cases, 2011–2020 · leading case: Marsh v. Sandstone North, LLC, 2020 IL App (4th) 190314 (Ill. App. Ct. 2020).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Marsh v. Sandstone North, LLC, 2020 IL App (4th) 190314 (Ill. App. Ct. 2020). · cites it 3× “ed hog farming? (3) Which came first, Defendants’ operations or Plaintiffs? (4) Can the facilities be operated in a different manner such that odor, flies, and/or dust can be reduced? (5) Is modification of the facilities practical?” ¶ 54 On appeal, plaintiffs argue the third…”
Toftoy v. Rosenwinkel, 2012 IL 113569 (Ill. 2013). · cites it 2× “¶7 Defendants moved for summary judgment, arguing that section 3 of the Farm Nuisance -2- Suit Act (Act) (740 ILCS 70/3 (West 2006)) barred plaintiffs’ nuisance suit.”
The Vill. of LaFayette v. Brown, 2015 IL App (3d) 130445 (Ill. App. Ct. 2015). · cites it 6× “” 740 ILCS 70/3 (West 2012). ¶ 19 The Village contends that the trial court properly found that section 3 of the Act was not applicable to defendants, as defendants failed to prove “any changed conditions in the 5 surrounding area.”
Alice Guth v. Tazewell Cnty., 698 F.3d 580 (7th Cir. 2012). “Allowing nuisance suits by newly arrived residents is a sensible rule because it enables land to be put to its highest-valued use; residential uses of land are very often more valuable (judging by price) than nonresidential uses, such as agriculture.”
Toftoy v. Rosenwinkel, 2011 IL App (2d) 100565 (Ill. App. Ct. 2011). · cites it 2× “) 740 ILCS 70/3 (West 2006). Only the changed-conditions provision in section 3 is at issue in this appeal.”
The Vill. of LaFayette v. Brown, 2015 IL App (3d) 130445 (Ill. App. Ct. 2015). · cites it 6× “” 740 ILCS 70/3 (West 2012). ¶ 19 The Village contends that the trial court properly found that section 3 of the Act was not applicable to defendants, as defendants failed to prove “any changed conditions in the surrounding area.”
Marsh v. Sandstone North, LLC, 2020 IL App (4th) 190314 (Ill. App. Ct. 2020). · cites it 3× “confined hog farming? (3) Which came first, Defendants’ operations or Plaintiffs? (4) Can the facilities be operated in a different manner such that odor, flies, and/or dust can be reduced? (5) Is modification of the facilities practical?” ¶ 54 On appeal, plaintiffs argue the…”
Toftoy v. Rosenwinkel, 961 N.E.2d 363 (Ill. App. Ct. 2011). · cites it 4× “) 740 ILCS 70/3 (West 2006). Only the changed-conditions provision in section 3 is at issue in this appeal.”
Vill. of Chadwick v. Nelson, 2017 IL App (2d) 170064 (Ill. App. Ct. 2017). “" 740 ILCS 70/3 (West 2016). ¶ 12 To determine whether Talea was exempt from prosecution under Ordinance No.”
Vill. of Chadwick v. Nelson, 2017 IL App (2d) 170064 (Ill. App. Ct. 2018). “” 740 ILCS 70/3 (West 2016). ¶ 12 To determine whether Talea was exempt from prosecution under Ordinance No.”
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.