Statute Annotations › Illinois › 20 Ill. Admin. Code § 504.850

20 Ill. Admin. Code § 504.850

Administrative Review Board grievance appeals: the cases that interpreted this section

Jurisdiction
Illinois
Case notes
4
Cited in passing
5
Citing cases indexed
11
Case dates
2019–2022
Screened through
2025-04-23
Courts' treatment: live
No reviewed case has held this section invalid, preempted, superseded or repealed.
This reflects what the reviewed cases said, not legislative action: a later amendment or repeal by the legislature would not appear here unless a reviewed case discussed it.

9 citing cases reviewed of 11 in the citation index: 4 interpreted the section (annotated below), 5 cited it only in passing. Cases filed after 2025-04-23 may not have been reviewed yet.

Have a situation under 20 Ill. Admin. Code § 504.850?

These notes show how courts have ruled. Ask about your specific facts and see which of these rulings apply, with citations you can check.

Appealing a grievance denial

Section 504.850(a) permits an inmate to appeal a grievance decision in writing within 30 days after the CAO’s decision; when no decision is issued, the inmate is not required to appeal to exhaust administrative remedies.

Butler v. Pfister · filed 2019-06-06(a)

Third, if the inmate feels that the issue is not resolved to his satisfaction following the CAO’s decision, he or she may appeal in writing within 30 days of the date of the decision. ... There is no basis in Ill. Admin. Code tit. 20, § 504 for defendants’ assertion that plaintiff failed to exhaust because he did not appeal the decision to the ARB. Plaintiff received no decision to appeal.
Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Section 504.850(a) requires an inmate to appeal a CAO's grievance denial to the ARB in order to fully exhaust administrative remedies.

Cross v. Aguinaldo · filed 2020-11-30(a)

Cross was required to appeal the denial of his October 2017 Grievances to the ARB in order to fully exhaust his remedies. Ill. Admin. Code tit. 20, § 504.850(a).
Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Section 504.850(a) allows an incarcerated person to appeal a grievance denial to the Administrative Review Board within 30 days, but the appeal remedy may be practically unavailable when prison officials take an unreasonable time to issue the denial.

Morgan v. Wexford Health Source, Inc. · filed 2022-08-13(a)

When an imprisoned person believes that a grievance has not been resolved satisfactorily by the grievance office, he may appeal the denial to the ARB within thirty days. Ill. Admin. Code tit. 20, § 504.850(a). ... The problem with defendants' argument lies in the obvious reason why Morgan did not appeal sooner: there was nothing to appeal, because it took the grievance office nearly eleven months to address his grievances. ... In short, by late October-early November 2020, Morgan had waited long enough to establish the practical unavailability of the grievance process. The Court therefore overrules defendants' contention that he failed to exhaust the grievance process before filing suit.
Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Final determination by IDOC Director

Section 504.850(e) requires completion of the ARB appeal process and receipt of the IDOC Director’s final determination before an inmate has exhausted administrative remedies and may sue.

McDonald v. Miles · filed 2022-01-31(e)

The ARB reviews the appeal and submits a written report of its findings and recommendations to the IDOC Director, who reviews that report and makes a final determination on the grievance. Ill. Admin. Code tit. 20, § 504.850(e). Once the inmate receives the IDOC Director’s final determination, he has exhausted his administrative remedies and may turn to the court system. Id.; Turley v. Rednour, 729 F.3d 645, 649 (7th Cir. 2013).
Read the full opinion on CourtListener →
5 more cases cited this section only in passing

These cases mention the section without interpreting it (a string cite, a footnote, background). Listed so you can see the full citation record, not just the annotated rulings.

Stewart v. McGinnis, the court merely lists § 504.850(a) as one step in the IDOC grievance process; it does not interpret, apply, or decide any issue about what the subsection requires. opinion →
Lyke v. Lank, the court merely recited the administrative appeal procedure while describing the exhaustion framework; it did not construe or decide the application of § 504.850. opinion →
Anderson v. Rabideau, the court recited the appeal procedures under § 504.850 as background. It did not construe or decide the meaning or application of subsections (d) or (e); the exhaustion ruling turned on the ARB’s treatment of the grievance as untimely after prison officials had addressed it on the merits. opinion →
James v. Tact, the court merely recites the grievance-appeal procedures in § 504.850(a), (d), and (e) as background. Its ruling concerned whether administrative remedies were available under the PLRA after prison officials failed to respond; it did not construe or decide the meaning or application of § 504.850. opinion →
McDonald v. Miles, the court cites § 504.850(e) to describe the administrative-review process, but it does not construe or apply that subsection to decide what it means or requires. The ruling instead concerns defendants’ failure to prove exhaustion. opinion →

Which of these rulings fit your facts?

Describe your situation under 20 Ill. Admin. Code § 504.850. Ezel checks it against the cases on this page and answers with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace