Illinois Compiled Statutes
755 ILCS 5/24-9 (2026)
Reopening estate
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
IL-ILGAilga.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
(755 ILCS 5/24-9)
(from Ch. 110 1/2, par. 24-9)
Sec. 24-9.
Reopening estate.) If a decedent's estate has been
closed and the representative discharged, it may be reopened to permit the
administration of a newly discovered asset or of an unsettled portion of the
estate on the petition of any interested person. If the petition asks the
appointment of
the former representative or a successor designated by the will, the court may
order such notice of the hearing on the petition to be given to any
interested persons as it directs or the court may hear the petition without
notice. If the
petition asks the appointment of a representative other than the one who was acting
when the prior administration was completed or a successor designated by the
will, notice of the hearing on the petition must be given as the court directs
to the former representative and to all persons entitled either to
administer or to nominate a person to administer equally with or
in preference to the petitioner. No notice need be given
to any person who personally appears at the hearing or who
files his waiver of notice. On the hearing, the court
may vacate the order of discharge or issue letters of office
as the case requires. A new bond based on the value
of the newly discovered asset or the unsettled portion of
the estate and limited to the administration thereof must be
furnished as provided by this Act.
(Source: P.A. 79-328.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2012–2023 · leading case: Carter v. SSC Odin Operating Co., 2012 IL 113204 (Ill. 2012).
Carter v. SSC Odin Operating Co., 2012 IL 113204 (Ill. 2012). “See 755 ILCS 5/24-9 (West 2006) (providing that decedent’s estate may be reopened “to permit the administration of a newly discovered asset”).”
Gecker v. Flynn, 223 F. Supp. 3d 740 (N.D. Ill. 2016). “” If 5/24-2 barred claims that new assets should be included in the estate, every claim under 755 ILCS 5/24-9 from individuals that received notice of the final account under 5/24-2 would be barred.”
In re Est. of Carlen, 2015 IL App (5th) 130599 (Ill. App. Ct. 2015). “¶7 On June 28, 2013, almost 19 years after the estate was originally opened and some 6 years after the closure of the Carlen estate, the Bank filed a “Petition to Reopen Estate” pursuant to section 24-9 of the Probate Act of 1975 (755 ILCS 5/24-9 (West 2006)). The Bank alleged…”
In re Est. of Carlen, 2015 IL App (5th) 130599 (Ill. App. Ct. 2015). “¶7 On June 28, 2013, almost 19 years after the estate was originally opened and some 6 years after the closure of the Carlen estate, the Bank filed a "Petition to Reopen Estate" pursuant to section 24-9 of the Probate Act of 1975 (755 ILCS 5/24-9 (West 2006)). The Bank alleged…”
In re Est. of Phillips, 2023 IL App (1st) 200229-U (Ill. App. Ct. 2023). “Alternatively, Anthony claims that the estate should be reopened for the specific purpose of recovering attorney fees pursuant to either section 2-1401 or section 24-9 of the Probate Act of 1975 (755 ILCS 5/24-9 ((West 2018)). For the reasons below, we affirm the court’s order…”
In re Est. of Fiklin, 2022 IL App (3d) 190534-U (Ill. App. Ct. 2022). “¶ 14 Respondents identify three issues for our review: (1) was there a valid conveyance of farmland from Land Trust 104 to the Ficklin Family Trust in 2008? (2) did the court err in its application of 755 ILCS 5/24-9 in reopening Roy’s estate? and (3) did the court err in…”
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.
|