735 Ill. Comp. Stat. § 5/1-109

A section 1-109 verification may substitute for an affidavit supporting a section 2-619 motion to dismiss.

Northwestern Illinois Area Agency on Aging v. Basta · filed 2022-06-29

See In re Estate of Mosquera, 2013 IL App (1st) 120130, ¶ 24 ... (holding that a verification under section 1-109 of the Code is an acceptable substitute for an affidavit for purposes of a motion to dismiss under section 2-619). ... By presenting adequate evidence that the Transparency Policy was never implemented or made part of the Manual, defendant satisfied the initial burden of going forward on the motion to dismiss.

Section 1-109 gives a properly certified declaration the same force and effect as a sworn affidavit.

Wolfson v. Dugout Northbrook, LLC · filed 2025-11-12

With his declaration, Wolfson filed a verification pursuant to section 1-109 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which provides: “Any pleading, affidavit, or other document certified in accordance with this Section may be used in the same manner and with the same force and effect as though subscribed and sworn to under oath, and there is no further requirement that the pleading, affidavit, or other document be sworn before an authorized person.” 735 ILCS 5/1-109 (West 2024). Thus, we treat his declaration the same as an affidavit.

Section 5/1-109 permits verification of a court filing by certification.

People v. Downey · filed 2023-12-20

Although defendant states in his supporting memorandum that the petition was unverified, the record reflects that an assistant state’s attorney properly verified the petition by certification. See 735 ILCS 5/1-109 (West 2022) (providing for the verification of court filings by certification).

Section 1-109 requires a certification of truth under penalty of perjury for a pleading to be verified.

Nationstar Mortgage LLC v. Lewis · filed 2026-03-05

However, Lewis’ petition was not accompanied by an affidavit, nor did it contain the necessary certification making it a verified pleading. See 735 ILCS 5/1-109 (West 2024) (defining a verified pleading as one containing a certification of truth under penalty of perjury).

A section 1-109 declaration may be considered at summary judgment when neither party objects to its use instead of a sworn affidavit.

Schodrof v. CC Services, Inc. · filed 2022-07-07

However, where, as here, neither party objects to the use of a Declaration in lieu of an affidavit, the issue is forfeited and the Declaration may be considered ... both by the circuit court and the reviewing court.

Section 1-109 permits an affidavit to be verified by certification.

People v. Adams · filed 2023-06-14

The second page of defendant’s filing contains defendant’s certification averring what he wrote is “true and correct.” Section 1-109 of the Code of Civil Procedure permits affidavits to be verified by certification (735 ILCS 5/1-109 (West 2020)). Thus, defendant’s filing sufficiently qualifies as an affidavit for Rule 604(d) purposes.

A verification under section 1-109 is equivalent to an affidavit for a motion to dismiss under section 2-619.

Thompson v. Glenwood Manor Condominium Association 3 · filed 2020-09-09

The affidavit was signed by Schimanski, pursuant to section 1-109 of the Code (735 ILCS 5/1-109 (West 2016)). A verification under section 1-109 of the Code has been held to be the equivalent of an affidavit for purposes of a motion to dismiss under section 2-619. In re Estate of Mosquera, 2013 IL App (1st) 120130, ¶ 24. Plaintiff failed to offer a counteraffidavit in response. Thus, the statements in Schimanski’s affidavit are taken as an admission of fact.

Section 1-109 allows a certified pleading to serve as a sworn affidavit in support of a motion to dismiss.

Griffin v. Universal Casualty Co. · filed 1995-08-25

Under section 1 — 109 of the Code of Civil Procedure, a certified pleading may be used "as though subscribed and sworn to under oath.” (735 ILCS 5/1 — 109 (West 1992).) We judge that Fuchs’ certification of a portion of the defendant’s motion to dismiss is the equivalent of an affidavit under Illinois Supreme Court Rule 191, which governs affidavits filed under section 2 — 619 of the Code.

Section 1-109 gives a certified proof of service the same force as a sworn proof, and an unsworn allegation of incompleteness does not rebut it.

Szkoda v. ILLINOIS HUMAN RIGHTS COM'N · filed 1998-12-16

A proof of service certified pursuant to section 1 — 109 of the Code of Civil Procedure, as here, “may be used in the same manner and with the same force and effect as though subscribed and sworn to under oath.” 735 ILCS 5/1—109 (West 1996). Accordingly, an unsworn allegation of incompleteness, as by Szkoda here, will not suffice to rebut such a proof of service.

Section 1-109 gives a properly certified pleading the same force as a sworn affidavit.

People v. Rivera · filed 2003-08-20

Here, the petition is accompanied by a certification that references “Section 1 — 109 of the Code of Civil Procedure.” Said section provides in part, “Any pleading, affidavit or other document certified in accordance with this Section may be used in the same manner and with the same force and effect as though subscribed and sworn to under oath” (emphasis added) (735 ILCS 5/1 — 109 (West 2000)). Thus, this certification is at least the equivalent of an affidavit, unlike the verification contained in Collins.

Section 1-109 allows a certified petition to satisfy a verification requirement without a separate affidavit from the petitioner.

In Re Marriage of Manhoff · filed 2007-12-05

Cindy’s petition included a certification under section 1 — 109 of the Code, in which she certified that she believed the matters stated in the petition to be true. We find that the petition was not defective because it was certified rather than accompanied by an additional affidavit by Cindy.

Section 1-109 allows a certified verification to serve as the equivalent of an affidavit supporting a motion to dismiss under Supreme Court Rule 191.

In re Estate of Mosquera · filed 2013-05-10

Section 1-109 also states that, “[a]ny pleading, affidavit or other document certified in accordance with this Section may be used in the same manner and with the same force and effect as though subscribed and sworn to under oath.” ... In this case, we find that respondent’s verification was the equivalent of an affidavit for purposes of Supreme Court Rule 191.

Section 1-109 verification by certification can satisfy the affidavit requirement for denying an allegation based on lack of knowledge.

Hoxha v. LaSalle National Bank · filed 2006-03-28

Here, defendants’ claim of lack of knowledge is contained in their answer, which includes Donna Forrest’s section 1 — 109 “Verification by Certification” that the statements in the answer are true and correct. 735 ILCS 5/1 — 109 (West 2000). We believe the certification satisfies the section 2 — 610 requirement.

Section 1-109 allows a certification under penalty of perjury to satisfy a requirement that a court document be sworn or verified.

Vision Point of Sale, Inc. v. Haas · filed 2007-09-20

We therefore hold that the section 1 — 109 verification constituted the very “sworn statement” that Rule 216 requires.

Section 1-109 verification attests under penalty of perjury to the truth of a pleading, but does not by itself publish the pleading’s statements.

Missner v. Clifford · filed 2009-08-12

A section 1 — 109 verification is a communication to the court that the verifier attests, under penalty of perjury, that the statements contained in a pleading are true. ... However, a verification does not stand on its own; it is submitted to the court along with the pleading to which it refers. That is, the statements being verified are not communicated until the pleading is filed with the court. Therefore, a verification is not, by itself, a publication.

A section 1-109 certification can cover multiple filed documents when its wording and placement make clear that it applies to all of them.

People v. Scott · filed 2019-05-21

The State notes that defendant’s proof of service did not contain the certification language from section 1-109 and that the separate affirmation under penalty of perjury, which did state it, failed to name the document that it applied to. ... Contrary to the State’s contention, the affirmation under penalty of perjury made clear that it applied to all the documents that defendant filed. It explicitly stated that it applied to “everything contained herein,” and it was situated immediately after defendant’s proof of service and motion to proceed in forma pauperis.

Section 1-109 permits certification in place of a sworn affidavit; a document with neither a proper oath nor certification does not qualify as an affidavit.

In re Marriage of McCormick · filed 2020-11-05

There is also no certification as permitted under section 1-109 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/1-109 (West 2018)). ... Accordingly, we cannot find that Ryan’s “affidavit” was, in fact, an affidavit.

Section 1-109 requires a certification stating, under the penalties provided by law, that its factual statements are true and correct.

People v. Hemphill · filed 2025-10-31

That document, however, contained no “certification,” no statement that it was being made under the penalties provided under section 1-109 or that the statement as to when and where the notice of appeal was placed for mailing was “true and correct.” In addition, that letter did not contain a statement as to what address the notice of appeal was sent to. It was therefore not a certification as required by section 1-109 and failed to substantially comply with Rule 12(b)(6).

A section 1-109 certification must subject the signer to the statute’s penalties and verify that the statements in the document are true and correct.

King v. The Illinois State Board of Elections · filed 2026-03-26

Because King’s certificates failed to include any language subjecting herself to the penalties provided for in section 1-109 of the Code, they were not substantially in the form mandated by section 1-109 of the Code, and, in turn, her certificates failed to substantially comply with Rule 12(b)(5).

Section 1-109 requires a certification under penalty of perjury that the statements in the document are true and correct.

People v. Shunick · filed 2024-05-23

Petitioner’s certificate was not substantially in the form required by section 1-109 because it did not include (1) a verification under penalty of perjury (2) that the statements set forth in the document were true and correct.

Section 1-109 permits a return-of-service affidavit to be certified under penalty of perjury without notarization when its certification substantially meets the statutory requirements.

Statia v. Orlet · filed 2023-11-20

In his affidavit, Treacy stated: “I hereby declare that the above statement is true to the best of my knowledge and belief, and that I understand it is made for use as evidence in court and is subject to penalty for perjury.” We find that this statement is substantially similar to the requirements that the statement be made “[u]nder penalties as provided by law,” that the statement is “true and correct,” and that it otherwise is made “on information and belief.” Id. § 1-109.

An unsigned affidavit that omits section 1-109’s certification language is a nullity.

Stoller v. Goldberg · filed 2022-12-21

And, finally, most importantly, the affidavit is a nullity. It is unsigned, and it failed to recite the same section 1-109 language that was missing from Stoller’s own affidavit.

Section 1-109 permits a court filing that would otherwise require an oath to be certified under penalty of perjury.

Bank of America, N.A. v. Yun · filed 2022-05-18

We find that the declaration was sufficient in form since the information was based upon Jordan’s personal knowledge and a search of the Bank’s records and the declaration was made under penalty of perjury.

A certification under section 1-109 must affirm the document’s contents under the penalties provided by the section.

People v. Cruz · filed 2022-01-20

The record does not contain a certification pursuant to section 1-109 of the Code. Defendant dated his notice of appeal February 17, 2020, and his letter February 15, 2020, but did not state the date and time he placed the documents in the mailbox or that he did so under the penalties provided by section 1-109.

Section 1-109 requires a certification to substantially follow its prescribed form, including an attestation to the truth of its statements under penalties provided by law.

People v. Shunick · filed 2022-10-13

The proof of service in defendant’s motion for reconsideration contains no language resembling that prescribed by section 1-109.

A proof of service certification substantially complying with section 1-109 satisfies the certification requirement for prison mail under Rule 12(b)(6).

People v. Etter · filed 2023-04-13

Here, the “Proof/Certificate of Service” contains a certification substantially compliant with section 1-109 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/1-109 (West 2020)) and the full addresses to which the documents were to be delivered.

An affidavit lacking both evidence that it was made under oath and the certification language required by section 1-109 is invalid.

Tucker v. St. James Hospital · filed 1996-04-15

Moreover, the affidavit did not contain any evidence that it was taken under oath or any of the language required for certification under section 1 — 109 of the Code of Civil Procedure. 735 ILCS 5/1 — 109 (West 1994). Therefore, the affidavit was invalid.

Section 1-109 requires a signer to certify under penalty of perjury that a document’s statements are true and correct; knowingly certifying a false name violates the section.

Santiago v. E.W. Bliss Co. · filed 2010-12-21

There is no question here that plaintiff was fully aware that his real name was not Juan Ortiz. By certifying a false statement to the contrary, he not only violated section 1 — 109 and Rule 213, but arguably committed perjury as well, a Class 3 felony.

A section 1-109 certification must substantially follow the statutory form and invoke its criminal penalty; a statement that the signer was duly sworn does not qualify.

People v. McCoy · filed 2011-12-16

Defendant's verification makes no reference to section 1-109 or the Code of Civil Procedure; he has in no way invoked the criminal penalty of section 1-109. ... The verification is thus a failed affidavit, not anything substantially similar to a section 1-109 certification.

A return of service bearing only the words “I certify” does not meet section 1-109’s certification requirements and cannot stand alone as admissible evidence.

Pruitt v. Pruitt · filed 2013-08-02

The returns of service filed by the deputy sheriff are not sworn to or certified pursuant to section 1-109 of the Code (735 ILCS 5/1-109 (West 2012)). They, therefore, cannot stand alone as admissible evidence.

Section 1-109 requires certifying language that substantially attests to the truth of the facts stated in a document.

Walker v. Monreal · filed 2017-04-03

Walker’s proof of mailing indicated the date and place of deposit and the complete address of where the document was to be delivered but failed to include certifying language in substantial compliance with the requirements of section 1-109 of the Code.

Section 1-109 requires proof of mailing to include certifying language that substantially complies with its requirements.

Walker v. Monreal · filed 2017-06-22

Walker’s proof of mailing indicated the date and place of deposit and the complete address of where the document was to be delivered but failed to include certifying language in substantial compliance with the requirements of section 1-109 of the Code.

A signed certification that the statements in an instrument are true and correct can substantially comply with section 1-109 on its face.

City of Highland Park v. Bryan · filed 2019-05-31

Here, Norton’s certification in the sworn report substantially complied on its face with section 1-109 of the Code.

Section 1-109 allows a sworn report to be certified through a signed statement that its contents are true and correct under statutory penalties.

City of Highland Park v. Bryan · filed 2019-08-12

Here, Norton’s certification in the sworn report substantially complied on its face with section 1-109 of the Code.

Section 1-109 requires a sworn certification when a certification is used in place of an affidavit.

People v. Robinson · filed 2020-02-13

The letter was not notarized nor was there a sworn certification as provided in section 1-109 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/1-109 (West 2016)).

Section 1-109 requires a certification to substantially follow its prescribed form, including language subjecting the certifier to penalties for a deliberate falsehood.

People v. Shunick · filed 2022-12-07

A main feature of section 1-109 is the enforcement of truthfulness in the making of a statement. To that end, section 1-109 calls for the express self-subjection of the certifier to criminal liability should the statement contain a deliberate falsehood. Therefore, if a certificate of service—like the certificate of service in defendant’s motion for reconsideration—lacks language making the certification subject to the penalties in section 1-109, the certificate lacks a main feature of that section and, thus, is not substantially in the form that section requires.

Section 1-109 requires a certification to verify that its statements are true and correct and to subject the filer to the section’s penalties.

King v. Illinois State Board of Elections · filed 2026-03-09

Because King’s certificates failed to include any language subjecting herself to the penalties provided for in section 1-109 of the Code, they were not substantially in the form mandated by section 1-109 of the Code, and, in turn, her certificates failed to substantially comply with Rule 12(b)(5). ... Because King’s certificates failed to verify that the statements therein were true and correct, they were not substantially in the form mandated by section 1-109 of the Code, and, in turn, her certificates failed to substantially comply with Rule 12(b)(5).

A section 1-109 certification does not replace the notarized affidavit required to support an actual-innocence claim at the second stage of postconviction proceedings.

People v. Urzua · filed 2023-06-15

Therefore, under the particular circumstances of this case, wherein a claim of actual innocence is supported only by Spires’s unnotarized statement, an unnotarized statement made under penalty of perjury as set forth in section 1-109 of the Code (735 ILCS 5/1-109 (West 2010)) is insufficient to survive a second-stage motion to dismiss.

Section 1 — 109 permits verification under penalty of perjury in place of notarization required by the Code of Civil Procedure, but does not extend that substitution to requirements imposed by other statutes.

Mashni Corp. Ex Rel. Mashni v. Laski · filed 2004-06-21

Section 1 — 109 does not indicate, however, that verification is an acceptable substitute when a statute other than the Code of Civil Procedure requires notarization. Section 1 — 109 makes no reference to the liquor control or election statutes, and has no relevance in petition challenges.

Section 1-109 permits verification under penalty of perjury for documents governed by the Code of Civil Procedure, but that verification does not replace an affidavit required by Supreme Court Rule 12(b)(3).

People v. Tlatenchi · filed 2009-02-27

Therefore, for these reasons, we conclude that the verification provided by section 1 — 109 is not a substitute for the affidavit required by Rule 12(b)(3).

Section 1-109 verification does not substitute for the notarized affidavit required to prove mailing under Illinois Supreme Court Rule 12(b)(3).

People v. Smith · filed 2011-10-11

Moreover, the Tlatenchi court held the verification provided by section 1-109 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/1-109 (West 2006)) was not a substitute for the affidavit required by Rule 12(b)(3). ... In this case, while defendant's affidavit of service and proof of service are verified, they are not notarized. Thus, those documents are insufficient to prove defendant's postjudgment motion was timely mailed.

Section 1-109 certifications apply to verifications required by the Code of Civil Procedure and cannot verify a postconviction petition.

People v. Nitz · filed 2011-10-24

As a result, a section 1-109 certification may not verify a postconviction petition.

Section 1-109 certification does not cure an unnotarized affidavit verifying a postconviction petition.

People v. Turner · filed 2012-06-21

The affidavit’s lack of notarization was not cured by certification under section 1-109 of the Code, and thus the affidavit was not proper under the Act.

Section 1-109 permits self-verification of documents filed under the Code of Civil Procedure, but that verification does not replace an oath required by another statute.

People v. Wideman · filed 2013-05-28

While section 1-109 of the Code expressly allows self-verification of documents filed under that Code, such self-verification is not a proper substitute for oaths required by statutes other than that Code.

Section 1-109’s certification rule applies only within the Code of Civil Procedure and does not apply to postconviction petitions.

People v. Ross · filed 2015-09-18

Ross’s sworn statement pursuant to section 1-109 of the Civil Code has no applicability in postconviction proceedings.

Section 1-109 requires a want-of-knowledge affidavit to support a verified answer that claims insufficient knowledge; without it, the allegations are admitted.

Parkway Bank and Trust Company v. Korzen · filed 2013-09-23

Because the verified answer contains no “want of knowledge” affidavit as required by section 1-109 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/1-109 (West 2010)), defendants admitted the allegations of count I, paragraph 2, of the complaint, which establish the authenticity of the notes and mortgage.

Section 1-109 requires a want of knowledge affidavit to support a verified answer claiming insufficient knowledge to respond to an allegation; without it, the allegation is admitted.

Parkway Bank and Trust Company v. Korzen · filed 2014-02-11

Because the verified answer contains no “want of knowledge” affidavit as required by section 1-109 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/1-109 (West 2010)), defendants admitted the allegations of count I, paragraph 2, of the complaint, which establish the authenticity of the notes and mortgage.

Section 1-109 certifications may be used to support or oppose forum non conveniens motions under Rule 187.

18 Rabbits, Inc. v. Hearthside Food Solutions, LLC · filed 2020-12-29

Rule 187 contemplates that an affidavit may be used to support or oppose a motion to dismiss for forum non conveniens, but it does not expressly provide that certifications under section 1-109 may not be used in the same manner. Accordingly, we conclude that they are permissible.

A certification under section 5/1-109 can establish that an incarcerated litigant deposited a motion in institutional mail by the filing deadline.

People v. Karnes · filed 2024-09-03

Even though the defendant was an incarcerated, self-represented litigant during the time preceding the filing deadline, he simply did not provide a certification that he had deposited the motion into the institutional mail by the filing deadline. See 735 ILCS 5/1-109 (West 2022); Ill. S. Ct. Rs. 12(b)(6), 373 (eff. July 1, 2017).

Section 1-109 provides a certification under penalty of perjury that may replace a sworn statement; without the required certification, a prisoner cannot rely on the mailing date to establish timely filing.

People v. Arriaga · filed 2023-01-18

Because defendant failed to file a proper section 1-109 certification, we must use the file- stamped date of defendant’s pro se motion to calculate whether he filed the motion within 30 days of judgment.

Under the prisoner mailbox rule, the litigant must certify when and where the notice of appeal was deposited for mailing and give the complete delivery address in a section 1-109 affidavit.

People v. Hayes · filed 2021-12-06

To rely on the “mailbox rule,” the litigant must include an affidavit complying with section 1-109 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/1-109 (West 2020)) and stating the time and place of deposit in the mail and the complete address for delivery.