Illinois Compiled Statutes
810 ILCS 5/2-328 (2026)
Sale by auction
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
IL-ILGAilga.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
(810 ILCS 5/2-328)
(from Ch. 26, par. 2-328)
Sec. 2-328.
Sale by auction.
(1) In a sale by auction if goods are put up in lots each lot is the
subject of a separate sale.
(2) A sale by auction is complete when the auctioneer so announces
by the fall of the hammer or in other customary manner. Where a bid is
made while the hammer is falling in acceptance of a prior bid the
auctioneer may in his discretion reopen the bidding or declare the goods
sold under the bid on which the hammer was falling.
(3) Such a sale is with reserve unless the goods are in explicit
terms put up without reserve. In an auction with reserve the auctioneer
may withdraw the goods at any time until he announces completion of the
sale. In an auction without reserve, after the auctioneer calls for bids
on an article or lot, that article or lot cannot be withdrawn unless no
bid is made within a reasonable time. In either case a bidder may
retract his bid until the auctioneer's announcement of completion of the
sale, but a bidder retraction does not revive any previous bid.
(4) If the auctioneer knowingly receives a bid on the seller's
behalf or the seller makes or procures such a bid, and notice has not
been given that liberty for such bidding is reserved, the buyer may at
his option avoid the sale or take the goods at the price of the last
good faith bid prior to the completion of the sale. This subsection
shall not apply to any bid at a forced sale.
(Source: Laws 1961, p. 2101.)
(810 ILCS 5/Art. 2 Pt. 4 heading) PART 4.
TITLE, CREDITORS AND GOOD FAITH PURCHASERS
|
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1
case (1 in the last 5 years), 2022–2022 · leading case: Thompson Fine Art, Ltd v. Union League Club of Chicago, 2022 IL App (1st) 210391-U (Ill. App. Ct. 2022).
Thompson Fine Art, Ltd v. Union League Club of Chicago, 2022 IL App (1st) 210391-U (Ill. App. Ct. 2022). “” Thompson’s implicit claim is that Ross’s statement constituted the creation of an auction without reserve, wherein the Club would be bound to sell the painting to the highest bidder, regardless of whether the Club found the bid satisfactory.”
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.
|