ILCS » Chapter 815 · Act 306
Illinois Compiled Statutes

815 ILCS 306/10 (2026)

Definitions

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IL-ILGAilga.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(815 ILCS 306/10)
    Sec. 10. Definitions. In this Act:
    "Automotive repair" includes, but is not limited to:
        (1) All repairs to motor vehicles that are commonly
    
performed in a motor vehicle repair facility by a motor vehicle technician, including the diagnosis, installation, exchange, or repair of mechanical or electrical parts or units for any vehicle, the performance of any electrical or mechanical adjustment to any vehicle, or the performance of any service work required for routine maintenance or repair of any vehicle. The term does not include commercial fleet repair or maintenance transactions involving 2 or more vehicles or ongoing service or maintenance contracts involving vehicles used primarily for business purposes.
        (2) All repair work in motor vehicle repair
    
facilities that perform one or more specialties within the automotive repair service industry, including, but not limited to, refinishing, brake, electrical, exhaust repair or installation, front-end, radiators, tires, transmission, tune-up, and windshield. However, transactions involving the retail purchase of merchandise when a facility installs the merchandise as part of the transaction at the discretion of the customer for a firm price are not included. These transactions shall include but not be limited to tires, batteries, oil, and lube jobs.
    "Automotive repair facility" or "motor vehicle repair facility" means any person, firm, association, or corporation that for compensation engages in the business of automotive repair or diagnosis, or both, of malfunctions of motor vehicles.
    A "used" part consists of a used assembly removed from a vehicle and installed on a vehicle undergoing repair without the benefit of being rebuilt or remanufactured.
(Source: P.A. 90-426, eff. 1-1-98.)

    
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 2008–2019 · leading case: Montgomery v. Nostalgia Lane, Inc., 891 N.E.2d 994 (Ill. App. Ct. 2008).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Montgomery v. Nostalgia Lane, Inc., 891 N.E.2d 994 (Ill. App. Ct. 2008). · cites it 10× “” 815 ILCS 306/10 (West 2006). The parties debated in the trial court, as they do on appeal, whether the Plymouth Roadrunner project was an “automotive repair” and whether defendant qualifies as an “automotive repair facility” or a “motor vehicle repair facility” under section…”
Bell v. Ring, 2018 IL App (3d) 170649 (Ill. App. Ct. 2018). “See 815 ILCS 306/10(1) (West 2016). Neither of those two exceptions is present in the instant case, where there was only one vehicle involved and where there was no ongoing service or maintenance contract between the parties.”
Bell v. Ring, 2018 IL App (3d) 170649 (Ill. App. Ct. 2019). “See 815 ILCS 306/10(1) (West 2016). Neither of those two exceptions is present in the instant case, where there was only one vehicle involved and where there was no ongoing service or maintenance contract between the parties.”
Montgomery v. Nostalgia Lane, Inc. (Ill. App. Ct. 2008). · cites it 8× “" 815 ILCS 306/10 (West 2006). -5- No. 2--07--0661 The parties debated in the trial court, as they do on appeal, whether the Plymouth Roadrunner project was an "automotive repair" and whether defendant qualifies as an "automotive repair facility" or a "motor vehicle repair…”
— 815 ILCS 306/10(1) — 3 cases
Montgomery v. Nostalgia Lane, Inc., 891 N.E.2d 994 (Ill. App. Ct. 2008). “” 815 ILCS 306/10 (West 2006). The parties debated in the trial court, as they do on appeal, whether the Plymouth Roadrunner project was an “automotive repair” and whether defendant qualifies as an “automotive repair facility” or a “motor vehicle repair facility” under section…”
Bell v. Ring, 2018 IL App (3d) 170649 (Ill. App. Ct. 2018). “See 815 ILCS 306/10(1) (West 2016). Neither of those two exceptions is present in the instant case, where there was only one vehicle involved and where there was no ongoing service or maintenance contract between the parties.”
Bell v. Ring, 2018 IL App (3d) 170649 (Ill. App. Ct. 2019). “See 815 ILCS 306/10(1) (West 2016). Neither of those two exceptions is present in the instant case, where there was only one vehicle involved and where there was no ongoing service or maintenance contract between the parties.”
— 815 ILCS 306/10(2) — 2 cases
Montgomery v. Nostalgia Lane, Inc., 891 N.E.2d 994 (Ill. App. Ct. 2008). “” 815 ILCS 306/10 (West 2006). The parties debated in the trial court, as they do on appeal, whether the Plymouth Roadrunner project was an “automotive repair” and whether defendant qualifies as an “automotive repair facility” or a “motor vehicle repair facility” under section…”
Montgomery v. Nostalgia Lane, Inc. (Ill. App. Ct. 2008). “" 815 ILCS 306/10 (West 2006). -5- No. 2--07--0661 The parties debated in the trial court, as they do on appeal, whether the Plymouth Roadrunner project was an "automotive repair" and whether defendant qualifies as an "automotive repair facility" or a "motor vehicle repair…”
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.