ILCS » Chapter 750 · Act 36
Illinois Compiled Statutes

750 ILCS 36/206 (2026)

Simultaneous Proceedings

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IL-ILGAilga.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(750 ILCS 36/206)
    Sec. 206. Simultaneous Proceedings.
    (a) Except as otherwise provided in Section 204, a court of this State may not exercise its jurisdiction under this Article if, at the time of the commencement of the proceeding, a proceeding concerning the custody of the child has been commenced in a court of another state having jurisdiction substantially in conformity with this Act, unless the proceeding has been terminated or is stayed by the court of the other state because a court of this State is a more convenient forum under Section 207.
    (b) Except as otherwise provided in Section 204, a court of this State, before hearing a child-custody proceeding, shall examine the court documents and other information supplied by the parties pursuant to Section 209. If the court determines that a child-custody proceeding has been commenced in a court in another state having jurisdiction substantially in accordance with this Act, the court of this State shall stay its proceeding and communicate with the court of the other state. If the court of the state having jurisdiction substantially in accordance with this Act does not determine that the court of this State is a more appropriate forum, the court of this State shall dismiss the proceeding.
    (c) In a proceeding to modify a child-custody determination, a court of this State shall determine whether a proceeding to enforce the determination has been commenced in another state. If a proceeding to enforce a child-custody determination has been commenced in another state, the court may:
        (1) stay the proceeding for modification pending the
    
entry of an order of a court of the other state enforcing, staying, denying, or dismissing the proceeding for enforcement;
        (2) enjoin the parties from continuing with the
    
proceeding for enforcement; or
        (3) proceed with the modification under conditions it
    
considers appropriate.
(Source: P.A. 93-108, eff. 1-1-04.)

    
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 2007–2008 · leading case: In Re Sophia GL, 890 N.E.2d 470 (Ill. 2008).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
In Re Sophia GL, 890 N.E.2d 470 (Ill. 2008). · cites it 2× “" 750 ILCS 36/206(b) (West 2004). Judge Bell adhered to that statute when she called Judge Love eight times and wrote four letters.”
Cochran v. Lindeman, 890 N.E.2d 470 (Ill. 2008). · cites it 2× “” 750 ILCS 36/206(b) (West 2004). Judge Bell adhered to that statute when she called Judge Love eight times and wrote four letters.”
Carisa E. v. Jacob V.D., 868 N.E.2d 1076 (Ill. App. Ct. 2007). · cites it 2× “” 750 ILCS 36/206(a) (West 2004). Respondent urges that, under this section of the Act, because he had commenced a custody proceeding in Nevada prior to the date petitioner filed her petition in Illinois, the trial court lacked jurisdiction over this cause.”
In Re Joseph VD, 868 N.E.2d 1076 (Ill. App. Ct. 2007). · cites it 2× “" 750 ILCS 36/206(a) (West 2004). Respondent urges that, under this section of the Act, because he had commenced a custody proceeding in Nevada prior to *1078 the date petitioner filed her petition in Illinois, the trial court lacked jurisdiction over this cause.”
— 750 ILCS 36/206(a) — 2 cases
Carisa E. v. Jacob V.D., 868 N.E.2d 1076 (Ill. App. Ct. 2007). “” 750 ILCS 36/206(a) (West 2004). Respondent urges that, under this section of the Act, because he had commenced a custody proceeding in Nevada prior to the date petitioner filed her petition in Illinois, the trial court lacked jurisdiction over this cause.”
In Re Joseph VD, 868 N.E.2d 1076 (Ill. App. Ct. 2007). “" 750 ILCS 36/206(a) (West 2004). Respondent urges that, under this section of the Act, because he had commenced a custody proceeding in Nevada prior to *1078 the date petitioner filed her petition in Illinois, the trial court lacked jurisdiction over this cause.”
— 750 ILCS 36/206(b) — 4 cases
In Re Sophia GL, 890 N.E.2d 470 (Ill. 2008). “" 750 ILCS 36/206(b) (West 2004). Judge Bell adhered to that statute when she called Judge Love eight times and wrote four letters.”
Cochran v. Lindeman, 890 N.E.2d 470 (Ill. 2008). “” 750 ILCS 36/206(b) (West 2004). Judge Bell adhered to that statute when she called Judge Love eight times and wrote four letters.”
Carisa E. v. Jacob V.D., 868 N.E.2d 1076 (Ill. App. Ct. 2007). “” 750 ILCS 36/206(a) (West 2004). Respondent urges that, under this section of the Act, because he had commenced a custody proceeding in Nevada prior to the date petitioner filed her petition in Illinois, the trial court lacked jurisdiction over this cause.”
In Re Joseph VD, 868 N.E.2d 1076 (Ill. App. Ct. 2007). “" 750 ILCS 36/206(a) (West 2004). Respondent urges that, under this section of the Act, because he had commenced a custody proceeding in Nevada prior to *1078 the date petitioner filed her petition in Illinois, the trial court lacked jurisdiction over this cause.”
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.