735 Ill. Comp. Stat. § 5/2-615

On review of a section 2-615 dismissal, the question is whether the dismissed counts state causes of action upon which relief could be granted.

Imperial Apparel, Ltd. v. Cosmo's Designer Direct, Inc. · filed 2006-07-31

Because this matter was disposed of at the trial level in response to the defendants’ section 2 — 615 motions, the only question before this court is whether the dismissed counts state causes of action upon which relief could be granted.

A dismissal under section 2-615 is reviewed de novo on appeal.

Hadley v. Illinois Department of Corrections · filed 2007-02-16

The present appeal arises from the grant of a section 2-615 motion to dismiss, a matter subject to de novo review.

A grant of a section 2–615 motion to dismiss is reviewed de novo on appeal.

Hadley v. The Illinois Department of Corrections · filed 2007-02-16

The present appeal arises from the grant of a section 2–615 motion to dismiss, a matter subject to de novo review.

A dismissal under section 2-615 is reviewed de novo on appeal.

Shaper v. Bryan · filed 2007-03-08

This court reviews a trial court’s dismissal based upon section 2 — 615 de novo.

A dismissal for failure to state a cause of action under section 2-615 is reviewed de novo.

Rodriguez v. ILLINOIS PRISONER REVIEW BD. · filed 2007-06-04

The grant of a motion to dismiss for a failure to state a cause of action filed pursuant to section 2-615 or a motion for an involuntary dismissal based on defects or defenses in the pleadings pursuant 2-619 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/2-615, 2-619 (West 2004)) is subject to de novo review.

A dismissal under section 2-615 for failure to state a cause of action is reviewed de novo.

Rodriguez v. Illinois Prisoner Review Board · filed 2007-06-04

The grant of a motion to dismiss for a failure to state a cause of action filed pursuant to section 2-615 or a motion for an involuntary dismissal based on defects or defenses in the pleadings pursuant 2-619 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/2-615, 2-619 (West 2004)) is subject to de novo review.

A dismissal under section 2-615 is reviewed de novo.

Gore v. Indiana Insurance · filed 2007-09-05

Our standard of review of a motion to dismiss under section 2 — 615 is de novo.

A section 2-615 dismissal is reviewed de novo, with the complaint construed in the plaintiff’s favor to determine whether it states a cause of action.

Brandt Construction Co. v. Ludwig · filed 2007-09-21

We review an order granting a motion to dismiss pursuant to section 2-615 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 2004)) de novo. Mt. Zion State Bank & Trust v. Consolidated Communications, Inc., 169 Ill.2d 110, 115, 214 Ill.Dec. 156, 660 N.E.2d 863, 867 (1995). On appeal, we must determine whether the allegations of the plaintiff's complaint, when construed in the light most favorable to him, are sufficient to establish a cause of action upon which relief may be granted.

A ruling on a section 2-615 motion to dismiss is reviewed de novo.

Brandt Consturction Co. v. Ludwig · filed 2007-09-21

We review an order granting a motion to dismiss pursuant to section 2-615 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 2004)) de novo.

Dismissals under section 2-615 are reviewed de novo.

Chicago Title Land Trust Co.v. Board of Trustees of the Village of Barrington · filed 2007-09-24

“Under either section, our standard of review is de novo.”

Dismissals under section 2-615 are reviewed de novo.

DOD Technologies v. Mesierow Insurance Services, Inc. · filed 2008-02-14

We review a dismissal pursuant to section 2-615 de novo.

A dismissal under section 2-615 is reviewed de novo, and an additional factual basis outside the complaint is irrelevant to that review.

Nicor Gas Co. v. Village of Wilmette · filed 2008-02-29

Nicor correctly states that the standard of review of a dismissal pursuant to section 2-615 (as well as pursuant to section 2-619) of the Code is de novo, making the Village's attempt to present an additional factual basis for its position irrelevant.

A dismissal under section 2-615 is reviewed de novo by asking whether the complaint alleges facts that, if proved, would entitle the plaintiff to relief.

Landau v. CNA Financial Corporation · filed 2008-03-26

In reviewing an appeal from a motion to dismiss pursuant to section 2-615 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the reviewing court must determine “whether the complaint alleges sufficient facts which, if proved, would entitle the plaintiff to relief.” Morris B. Chapman & Associates, Ltd. v. Kitzman, 193 Ill. 2d 560, 568, 739 N.E.2d 1263, 1269 (2000). The standard of review of such a dismissal is de novo.

A grant of a motion to dismiss under section 2-615 is reviewed de novo on appeal.

Freeman v. Williamson · filed 2008-06-24

We similarly apply de novo review to a court’s grant of a motion to dismiss under either section 2 — 615 or 2 — 619 (Neppl v. Murphy, 316 Ill. App. 3d 581, 583, 736 N.E.2d 1174, 1178 (2000)) and to the construction, interpretation, or legal effect of a contract (Avery v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co., 216 Ill. 2d 100, 129, 835 N.E.2d 801, 821 (2005)).

A section 2-615 dismissal may be affirmed on appeal only if, viewing the allegations in the nonmoving party’s favor, no set of facts would entitle that party to relief.

Washington v. Walker · filed 2009-05-07

On appeals from section 2 — 615 dismissals, we will affirm only when, upon considering the allegations in the light most favorable to the nonmovant, it is clear no set of facts can be proved to entitle the nonmovant to relief.

On review of a section 2-615 dismissal, the court accepts well-pleaded facts as true, draws reasonable inferences from them, and applies de novo review.

Quigg v. Walgreen Co. · filed 2009-03-02

When reviewing a trial court’s disposition of a motion to dismiss under either section 2 — 615 of the Code (735 ILCS 5/2 — 615 (West 2006)) or section 2 — 619 of the Code (735 ILCS 5/2 — 619 (West 2006)), the reviewing court accepts all well-pleaded facts as true and makes all reasonable inferences therefrom. Zahl v. Krupa, 365 Ill. App. 3d 653, 658 (2006). Accordingly, we take as true the allegation that Walgreen made the disclosure. A dismissal under either section 2 — 615 or section 2 — 619 is reviewed de novo.

Dismissal under section 2-615 is reviewed de novo.

Sherman v. Ryan · filed 2009-05-20

This court reviews dismissal under section 2 — 615 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/2 — 615 (West 2006)) de novo.

A dismissal under section 2-615 is reviewed de novo on appeal.

Abram v. UNITED SERVICES AUTO. ASS'N · filed 2009-09-30

The granting of a motion to dismiss pursuant to section 2-615 of the Illinois Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 2006)) is reviewed under the de novo standard of review.

A ruling on a section 2-615 motion is reviewed de novo on appeal.

Poruba v. Poruba · filed 2009-12-07

A judge’s ruling pursuant to section 2 — 615 of the Code (735 ILCS 5/2 — 615 (West 2008)) is reviewed de novo.

Dismissals under section 2-615 are reviewed de novo.

Apollo Real Estate Investment Fund v. Gelber · filed 2010-02-11

Our standard of review on section 2-615 dismissals is de novo.

A court reviews a section 2-615 dismissal de novo, accepting well-pleaded facts as true and drawing reasonable inferences in favor of the nonmoving party.

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Terry · filed 2010-03-29

“This court reviews the grant of a section 2 — 615 motion to dismiss de novo, and we accept all well-pleaded facts in the complaint as true and draw all reasonable inferences from those facts in favor of the nonmoving party.”

A dismissal under section 2-615 is reviewed de novo on appeal.

Moore v. People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, Inc. · filed 2010-06-04

We review the grant of a motion to dismiss pursuant to section 2 — 615 de novo.

An order granting a section 2–615 motion to dismiss is reviewed de novo.

Raleigh v. Alcon Laboratories · filed 2010-08-06

We review an order granting a section 2–615 motion to dismiss de novo.

Section 2-615 allows a reviewing court to affirm dismissal on another ground supported by the record.

Sherman v. Township High School District 214 · filed 2010-09-30

If the cause should be dismissed for other reasons under section 2 — 615 of the Code, it is our obligation as a reviewing court to affirm the dismissal.

A dismissal for failure to state a claim under section 2-615 is reviewed de novo.

Behl v. Duffin · filed 2010-12-10

Section 2 — 619.1 authorizes combined motions to dismiss for failure to state a claim (735 ILCS 5/2 — 615 (West 2008)) and for an involuntary dismissal based upon certain defenses (735 ILCS 5/2 — 619 (West 2008)). This court reviews dismissals under these sections de novo.

A dismissal under section 2-615 is reviewed de novo.

Rabin v. KARLIN AND FLEISHER, LLC · filed 2011-03-18

Our review of a section 2 — 615 or section 2 — 619 dismissal is de novo.

An order granting a section 2-615 motion to dismiss is reviewed de novo on appeal.

Phoenix Insurance v. Rosen · filed 2011-04-21

The circuit court’s order granting a section 2 — 615 motion to dismiss is also reviewed de novo.

An order granting a section 2–615 motion to dismiss is reviewed de novo.

Phoenix Insurance Company v. Rosen · filed 2011-04-21

The circuit court’s order granting a section 2–615 motion to dismiss is also reviewed de novo.

A dismissal under section 2-615(a) is reviewed de novo.

JANE DOE-3 EX REL. JULIE DOE-3 v. White · filed 2011-04-29(a)

Regardless of whether the court dismissed plaintiffs’ complaints pursuant to section 2 — 615 or 2 — 619, or a combination of both sections pursuant to section 2 — 619.1, our standard of review is the same. We review de novo the court’s orders of dismissal.

A section 2-615 dismissal is reviewed de novo, with the complaint’s allegations viewed in the plaintiff’s favor to determine whether they state a cause of action.

HUBBARD STREET LOFTS LLC v. Inland Bank · filed 2011-12-13

When reviewing an order granting a motion to dismiss pursuant to section 2-615 of the Illinois Code of Civil Procedure, this court utilizes the de novo standard of review. ... The critical inquiry is whether, in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, the allegations of the complaint are sufficient to state a cause of action upon which relief can be granted.

Dismissals under section 2-615 are reviewed de novo.

Olson v. HUNTER'S POINT HOMES, LLC · filed 2012-01-04

The standard of review for a dismissal of a complaint, whether pursuant to section 2-615 of the Illinois Code of Civil Procedure (the Code) (735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 2010)) or section 2-619 of the Code (735 ILCS 5/2-619 (West 2010)), is de novo.

A dismissal under section 2-615 is reviewed de novo.

In re Application of the County Treasurer · filed 2012-02-17

Under either section 2-615 or 2-619 of the Code, our standard of review is de novo.

A dismissal under section 2-615 is reviewed de novo.

Robinson v. Washington Township · filed 2012-08-29

Under a dismissal pursuant to section 2-615 or section 2-619 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/2-615, 2-619 (West 2008)), our standard of review is de novo.

An order granting or denying a section 2-615 motion is reviewed de novo.

Bremen Community High School District No. 228 v. The Cook County Comm'n on Human Rights · filed 2012-11-08

We review an order granting or denying a section 2-615 motion de novo.

On review of a section 2-615 dismissal, the court must accept all well-pleaded facts as true.

Estate of Powell v. Wunsch, P.C. · filed 2013-03-29

When reviewing a circuit court’s ruling on a section 2-615 motion to dismiss, this court must accept as true all well-pleaded facts.

A ruling on a section 2-615 motion to dismiss is reviewed de novo.

Merrilees v. Merrilees · filed 2013-11-18

We review de novo a trial court’s decision granting or denying a section 2-615 motion to dismiss.

A dismissal under section 2-615 is reviewed de novo on appeal.

Interstate Bankers Casualty Co. v. Hernandez · filed 2014-02-19

The dismissal of a complaint pursuant to section 2-615 of the Illinois Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 2012)) is reviewed de novo.

A dismissal under section 2-615 is reviewed de novo.

Turcios v. The DeBruler Company · filed 2014-06-11

As a threshold matter, since this appeal comes to us following a dismissal pursuant to section 2-615 of the Civil Practice Law (735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 2012)), our review is de novo.

A dismissal under section 2-615 is reviewed de novo on appeal.

Turcios v. DeBruler Co. · filed 2014-07-29

As a threshold matter, since this appeal comes to us following a dismissal pursuant to section 2-615 of the Civil Practice Law (735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 2012)), our review is de novo.

Dismissals under section 2-615 are reviewed de novo on appeal.

Hayashi v. Illinois Department of Financial & Professional Regulation · filed 2014-10-17

We also review de novo the dismissal of a complaint pursuant to section 2-615 of the Code (735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 2012)).

A dismissal under section 2-615 is reviewed de novo.

Antonacci v. Seyfarth Shaw, LLP · filed 2015-08-17

We review the trial court's determination on motions to dismiss pursuant to sections 2-615 and 2-619 de novo.

Rulings on section 2-615 motions to dismiss are reviewed de novo.

Antonacci v. Seyfarth Shaw, LLP · filed 2015-10-22

We review the trial court’s determination on motions to dismiss pursuant to sections 2-615 and 2-619 de novo.

Dismissals under section 2-615 are reviewed de novo.

Bayview Loan Servicing, LLC v. Szpara · filed 2015-12-30

Defendants’ affirmative defenses and counterclaim were struck pursuant to sections 2-615 and 2-619 of the Code (735 ILCS 5/2-615, 2-619 (West 2012)). We review de novo dismissals under these sections of the Code.

Dismissals under section 2-615 are reviewed de novo.

Bayview Loan Servicing, LLC v. Szpara · filed 2016-02-17

Defendants’ affirmative defenses and counterclaim were struck pursuant to sections 2-615 and 2-619 of the Code (735 ILCS 5/2-615, 2-619 (West 2012)). We review de novo dismissals under these sections of the Code.

An order granting a section 2-615 motion to dismiss is reviewed de novo.

Accel Entertainment Gaming, LLC v. Village of Elmwood Park · filed 2016-02-19

We review de novo an order granting a section 2-615 motion to dismiss.

An order granting a section 2-615 motion to dismiss is reviewed de novo on appeal.

Mitchell v. People · filed 2016-04-28

We review the circuit court's order granting a section 2-615 motion to dismiss de novo.

An appellate court reviews the grant of a section 2-615 motion to dismiss de novo.

Johnson v. Williams · filed 2016-08-01

We review de novo the trial court’s grant of a section 2-615 motion to dismiss.

A dismissal under section 2-615 is reviewed de novo on appeal.

Johnson v. Williams · filed 2016-10-07

We review de novo the trial court’s grant of a section 2-615 motion to dismiss.

A dismissal under section 2-615 is reviewed de novo to determine whether the complaint’s allegations plead a viable claim for relief.

Sienna Court Condominium Association v. Champion Aluminum Corporation · filed 2017-02-17

The dismissal of the design defendants was granted pursuant to section 2-615 of the Code of Civil Procedure. 735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 2014). Thus, we review the dismissals de novo to assess whether the plaintiff’s allegations pleaded a viable claim for relief.

Section 2-615 dismissals are reviewed de novo to determine whether the allegations plead a viable claim for relief.

Sienna Court Condominium Ass'n v. Champion Aluminum Corp. · filed 2017-06-06

The dismissal of the design defendants was granted pursuant to section 2-615 of the Code of Civil Procedure. 735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 2014). Thus, we review the dismissals de novo to assess whether the plaintiff’s allegations pleaded a viable claim for relief. See Illinois Insurance Guaranty Fund v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Co., 2013 IL App (1st) 123345, ¶ 14.

When reviewing a section 2-615 dismissal, a court accepts well-pleaded facts as true and draws reasonable inferences in the plaintiff’s favor.

City of Chicago v. City of Kankakee · filed 2017-09-29

For purposes of this appeal, because the circuit court either dismissed the third amended complaint for failing to state a cause of action under section 2-615 of the Code of Civil Procedure (Code) (735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 2014)) or for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction ... under section 2-619(a)(1) of the Code (735 ILCS 5/2-619(a)(1) (West 2014)), we recite and accept as true all well-pleaded facts alleged in plaintiffs’ third amended complaint and draw all reasonable inferences from these facts in favor of plaintiffs (Edelman, Combs & Latturner v. Hinshaw & Culbertson, 338 Ill. App. 3d 156, 164 (2003)) in our de novo review.

On review of a section 2-615 dismissal, the court accepts well-pleaded facts as true and draws reasonable inferences in the plaintiff’s favor.

City of Chicago v. City of Kankakee · filed 2017-11-01

For purposes of this appeal, because the circuit court either dismissed the third amended ... complaint for failing to state a cause of action under section 2-615 of the Code of Civil Procedure (Code) (735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 2014)) or for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction under section 2-619(a)(1) of the Code (735 ILCS 5/2-619(a)(1) (West 2014)), we recite and accept as true all well-pleaded facts alleged in plaintiffs’ third amended complaint and draw all reasonable inferences from these facts in favor of plaintiffs (Edelman, Combs & Latturner v. Hinshaw & Culbertson, 338 Ill. App. 3d 156, 164 (2003)) in our de novo review.

On review of a section 2-615 dismissal, the court accepts well-pleaded facts as true, draws reasonable inferences in the plaintiff’s favor, and reviews de novo.

City of Chicago v. City of Kankakee · filed 2017-12-18

For purposes of this appeal, because the circuit court either dismissed the third amended complaint for failing to state a cause of action under section 2-615 of the Code of Civil Procedure (Code) (735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 2014)) or for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction under section 2-619(a)(1) of the Code (735 ILCS 5/2-619(a)(1) (West 2014)), we recite and accept as true all well-pleaded facts alleged in plaintiffs’ third amended complaint and draw all reasonable inferences from these facts in favor of plaintiffs (Edelman, Combs & Latturner v. Hinshaw & Culbertson, 338 Ill. App. 3d 156, 164 (2003)) in our de novo review.

A motion to dismiss under section 2-615 is reviewed de novo.

Midwest Med. Records Ass'n, Inc. v. Brown · filed 2018-02-01

This court reviews motions to dismiss under section 2-615 of the Code de novo.

A dismissal under section 2-615 raises issues of law and is reviewed de novo.

Paul v. County of Ogle · filed 2018-04-20

A motion to dismiss under section 2-615 raises issues of law; we therefore review the dismissal de novo.

A dismissal under section 2-615 is reviewed de novo on appeal.

Ammons v. Wisconsin Central, Ltd. · filed 2018-12-17

We review the dismissal of a claim under either section 2-615 or section 2-619 de novo.

A ruling on a section 2-615 motion to dismiss is reviewed de novo.

Cedarhurst of Bethalto Real Estate, LLC v. Village of Bethalto · filed 2019-02-06

Our review of this issue is de novo. The underlying motion denied by the trial court was based upon sections 2-615 and 2-619 of the Code of Civil Procedure, both of which mandate de novo review.

An order granting a section 2-615 motion is reviewed de novo.

Racanelli v. People · filed 2019-11-21

We review de novo an order granting a section 2-615 motion.

An order granting or denying a section 2-615 motion to dismiss a section 2-1401 petition is reviewed de novo.

Perry v. Boettcher · filed 2020-05-15

We review an order granting or denying a section 2-615 motion to dismiss a section 2-1401 petition de novo.

A dismissal under section 2-615 is reviewed de novo.

Arsberry v. Baldwin · filed 2020-05-22

Regardless of whether the circuit court’s dismissal of petitioner’s mandamus action was under section 2-615 or 2-619, or a combination of both sections pursuant to section 2-619.1, this court’s standard of review is the same. ... We review de novo the circuit court’s dismissal.

A dismissal under section 2-615 for failure to state a claim is reviewed de novo.

Ryan v. City of Chicago · filed 2020-06-17

When the circuit court grants a section 2-615 motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, we apply the de novo standard on appeal.

A dismissal under section 2-615 is reviewed de novo.

Hotz v. Hightower · filed 2020-12-01

We review a dismissal under either section 2-615 or section 2-619 de novo.

A dismissal under section 2-615 is reviewed de novo, with all well-pleaded factual allegations accepted as true.

Trainauskas v. Dalton · filed 2021-04-06

Regardless of whether the circuit court’s dismissal of petitioner’s petitions was under section 2-615 or 2-619, or a combination of both sections pursuant to section 2-619.1, this court’s standard of review is the same. Jane Doe-3 ex rel. Julie Doe-3 v. White, 409 Ill. App. 3d 1087, 1092, 951 N.E.2d 216, 223 (2011). We review de novo the circuit court’s dismissal. White, 409 Ill. App. 3d at 1092, 951 N.E.2d at 223. “In doing so, we will accept as true all well-pleaded factual allegations.”

A dismissal under section 2-615 is reviewed de novo.

Harris v. Department of Corrections · filed 2021-04-22

Regardless of whether the circuit court’s dismissal of petitioner’s mandamus action was under section 2-615 or 2-619, or a combination of both sections pursuant to section 2-619.1, this court’s standard of review is the same. ... We review de novo the circuit court’s dismissal.

A dismissal under section 2-615 is reviewed de novo, with well-pleaded factual allegations accepted as true.

Franklin v. Baldwin · filed 2021-04-22

Regardless of whether the circuit court’s considered respondents’ motions to dismiss were brought under section 2-615 or 2-619, this court’s standard of review is the same. ... We review de novo the circuit court’s dismissal. ... “In doing so, we will accept as true all well-pleaded factual allegations.”

A dismissal under section 2-615 is reviewed de novo.

Ausmas v. Jeffreys · filed 2021-06-11

Regardless of whether the circuit court’s dismissal of petitioner’s petition was under section 2-615 of the Procedure Code (735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 2018)) or section 2-619 of the Procedure Code (735 ILCS 5/2-619 (West 2018)), or a combination of both sections pursuant to section 2-619.1, this court’s standard of review is the same. ... We review de novo the circuit court’s dismissal.

A dismissal for failure to state a cause of action under section 2-615 is reviewed de novo.

Smith v. Jeffreys · filed 2021-08-04

“The grant of a motion to dismiss for a failure to state a cause of action filed pursuant to section 2-615 or a motion for an involuntary dismissal based on defects or defenses in the pleadings pursuant to section 2-619 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/2-615, 2-619 (West 2004)) is subject to de novo review.”

Dismissals under section 2-615 are reviewed de novo.

Garza v. Pritzker · filed 2021-08-20

Regardless of whether the circuit court’s dismissal of petitioner’s petition was under section 2-615 of the Procedure Code (735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 2020)) or section 2-619 of the Procedure Code (735 ILCS 5/2-619 (West 2020)), or a combination of both sections pursuant to section 2-619.1, this court’s standard of review is the same. Jane Doe-3 ex rel. Julie Doe-3 v. White, 409 Ill. App. 3d 1087, 1092, 951 N.E.2d 216, 223 (2011). We review de novo the circuit court’s dismissal.

A dismissal for failure to state a cause of action under section 2-615 is reviewed de novo.

Barr v. Grissom · filed 2021-10-28

“The grant of a motion to dismiss for a failure to state a cause of action filed pursuant to section 2-615 or a motion for an involuntary dismissal based on defects or defenses in the pleadings pursuant to section 2-619 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/2-615, 2-619 (West 2014)) is subject to de novo review.”

Dismissals under section 2-615 are reviewed de novo.

Kroutil v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company · filed 2021-11-18

Regardless of whether the circuit court’s dismissal of plaintiff’s petition was under section 2-615 of the Procedure Code (735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 2020)) or section 2-619 of the Procedure Code (735 ILCS 5/2-619 (West 2020)), or a combination of both sections pursuant to section 2-619.1 (735 ILCS 5/2-619.1 (West 2020)), this court’s standard of review is de novo.

A section 2-615 dismissal is reviewed de novo, with the court asking whether the complaint alleges facts that, if proven, could entitle the plaintiff to relief.

Goldberg v. Ismie Mutual Insurance Company · filed 2021-12-23

As this matter comes to us on appeal from a dismissal pursuant to a section 2–615 motion, our review is de novo. The question presented is whether sufficient facts are alleged within the complaint which, if established, could entitle the plaintiff to the relief he seeks.

A trial court’s ruling under section 2-615 is reviewed de novo on appeal.

Mentgen v. Dowell · filed 2022-03-10

The Dowells’ brought combined motions to dismiss pursuant to section 2-619(a)(9) of the Code of Civil Procedure and to strike pursuant to section 2-615 of the Code (735 ILCS 5/2-619(a)(9), -615 (West 2018). We review de novo a trial court’s ruling under either section. See Gatreaux v. DKW Enterprises, LLC, 2011 IL App (1st) 103482, ¶ 10.

An order granting a section 2-615 motion is reviewed de novo.

Tri-Plex Technical Service, Ltd v. Jon-Don, LLC · filed 2022-11-04

An order granting a 2-615 motion is reviewed de novo.

On review of a dismissal under section 2-615, the court accepts well-pleaded facts as true and draws reasonable inferences in the plaintiff’s favor.

Project44, Inc. v. FourKites, Inc. · filed 2022-11-22

Because this case was dismissed for failure to state a claim, we accept all well-pleaded facts in the complaint as true and adopt all reasonable inferences in favor of the plaintiff. Kolegas v. Heftel Broadcasting Corp., 154 Ill. 2d 1, 8-9 (1992); 735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 2020).

A dismissal under section 2-615 is reviewed de novo on appeal.

Barnett v. Apple Inc. · filed 2022-12-23

On appeal, our review of a trial court’s section 2-615 dismissal is de novo.

A section 2-615 motion tests the legal sufficiency of the complaint, and dismissal on that basis is reviewed de novo.

Midwest Lending Corp. v. Horton · filed 2023-05-22

Because a motion to dismiss pursuant to section 2-615 of the Code (735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 2020)) attacks the legal sufficiency of Midwest’s complaint, this court applies a de novo standard of review.

Dismissals under section 2-615 are reviewed de novo.

Otto v. Chicago Public Media, Inc. · filed 2023-08-11

We review dismissals pursuant to section 2-615 de novo.

An order granting a section 2-615 motion to dismiss is reviewed de novo.

McDermott v. Peters · filed 2023-11-02

We review an order granting a section 2-615 motion to dismiss de novo.

Orders entered under section 2-615 are reviewed de novo on appeal.

M.U. v. Team Illinois Hockey Club, Inc. · filed 2024-03-08

We apply a de novo standard of review to orders entered pursuant to section 2-615.

A dismissal under section 2-615 is reviewed de novo on appeal.

AZ SPE, LLC v. City of Chicago · filed 2024-03-28

The trial court’s order dismissing AZ’s due process claims with prejudice does not specify if these claims were dismissed pursuant to section 2-619(a)(9) of the Code for lack of standing or section 2-615 of the Code for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. However, under either section, our review is de novo.

A dismissal under section 2-615 is reviewed de novo.

Shrock v. Meier · filed 2024-12-20

The grant of a section 2-615 motion to dismiss is reviewed de novo.

After a dismissal under section 2-615, the reviewing court draws the facts from the complaint’s well-pleaded allegations and attached exhibits.

PBKM, LLC v. Kutak Rock, LLP · filed 2024-12-24

As this case comes to us after dismissal under section 2-615 of the Code of Civil Procedure, we draw our facts from the well-pleaded allegations of the amended complaint and its attached exhibits.

A motion to dismiss under section 2-615 is reviewed de novo on appeal.

U.S. Bank Trust National Ass'n v. Kindt · filed 2025-08-21

Our standard of review of a motion to dismiss under section 2-615 or 2-619 is de novo.

Whether dismissal under section 2-615 was appropriate is a question of law reviewed de novo on appeal.

FCA Consultants v. City of Chicago · filed 2025-09-12

Whether dismissal was appropriate under section 2-615 presents a question of law which we review de novo.

On review of a section 2-615 dismissal, the question is whether the complaint states a viable cause of action.

Stallings v. Santander Consumer USA · filed 2026-04-14

When reviewing a motion to dismiss under section 2-615, our only question is whether the complaint states a viable cause of action.

An order dismissing claims under section 2-615 is reviewed de novo.

New Heights Recovery & Power, LLC v. Bower · filed 2004-03-09

We review de novo a trial court order granting summary judgment (City of Chicago v. Holland, 206 Ill. 2d 480, 487, 795 N.E.2d 240 (2003)), as well as an order dismissing claims under section 2 — 615 of the Code (Brandt v. Boston Scientific Corp., 204 Ill. 2d 640, 644-45, 792 N.E.2d 296 (2003)).

Section 2-615 requires specific factual allegations to withstand a motion to dismiss; conclusional allegations of fact or law are disregarded.

Hartline v. Celotex Corp. · filed 1995-05-23

To withstand a motion to dismiss, a complaint must be supported by specific factual allegations. Conclusional allegations of fact or law are not to be considered by the court in ruling on such a motion.

Section 2-615 does not require a court to accept a conclusory allegation unsupported by factual allegations as true on a motion to dismiss.

Abbott v. Amoco Oil Co. · filed 1993-08-18

Thus, the dealers’ assertion that the DSA’s are inequitable adhesion contracts is a conclusory allegation unsupported by other factual allegations and is not deemed admitted for purposes of a section 2 — 615 motion to dismiss.

Section 2-615 tests whether the complaint’s allegations state a cause of action; conclusory allegations do not suffice.

Boatwright v. Delott · filed 1994-11-09

A motion to dismiss pursuant to section 2 — 615 attacks the sufficiency of a complaint and will be decided solely on the allegations set forth in the complaint. ... These conclusional allegations in the complaint are insufficient to meet Illinois’ stringent pleading requirements for fraud.

Section 2-615(a) requires courts reviewing a complaint for failure to state a cause of action to accept well-pleaded facts and reasonable inferences as true, but not unsupported conclusions.

Hoye v. Illinois Power Co. · filed 1995-02-17(a)

Without accepting unsupported conclusions of fact or law in the complaint, we take as true all well-pleaded facts, and the reasonable inferences therefrom, in determining de novo whether there are sufficient facts alleged in the pleading which, if proved, could entitle plaintiff to relief.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal when a complaint fails to allege facts necessary to state a cause of action, even when its pleadings are liberally construed.

Bastian v. Petren Resources Corp. · filed 1995-02-24

Because the amended complaint fails to allege the necessary causal connection between defendants’ alleged misconduct and the ultimate failure of the partnerships, we find the trial court properly granted defendants’ section 2 — 615 motion. The fact that the pleadings of the complaint are liberally construed does not lessen the obligation of the plaintiff to set out facts necessary for recovery under the theories asserted in the complaint.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal when a complaint lacks specific factual allegations needed to state a cause of action.

Joseph v. Collis · filed 1995-04-26

Each of the section 2 — 615 motions to dismiss filed by Vanek, Olson, Horek, and Josefowicz asserted that the plaintiffs’ amended complaint was factually insufficient to state a cause of action. We agree. Having reviewed the amended complaint, we find that the plaintiffs failed to allege with specificity facts which would enable them to withstand the motions to dismiss for failure to state a cause of action.

A plaintiff opposing dismissal under section 2-615 must support a claim with specific factual allegations rather than mere conclusions.

Anderson v. Vanden Dorpel · filed 1996-04-18

In opposing a motion for dismissal under section 2-615 of the Code of Civil Procedure, a plaintiff cannot rely simply on mere conclusions of law or fact unsupported by specific factual allegations.

Section 2-615 requires a court to accept well-pleaded facts as true on a motion to dismiss, but not legal conclusions or factual conclusions unsupported by specific facts.

River Park, Inc. v. City of Highland Park · filed 1996-06-12

A section 2 — 615 motion admits all well-pleaded facts as true, but not conclusions of law or factual conclusions which are unsupported by allegations of specific facts.

Section 2-615 does not permit dismissal for a technical pleading defect when the complaint states any cause of action, even one the plaintiff did not intend.

Moran v. City of Chicago · filed 1997-02-05

Although plaintiff's count IV violates our civil practice rules, which require that each separate cause of action be stated in a separate count (735 ILCS 5/2-603(b) (West 1994)), the defendants made no motion to strike (see 735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 1994)). Moreover, notwithstanding this technical defect, the complaint will not be dismissed unless it fails to state any cause of action, even if it is not the cause of action intended by the plaintiff.

On a section 2-615 motion, inconsistent allegations may be construed against the pleader.

Shelter Management XIX v. Much Shelist Freed Denenberg and Ament P. C. · filed 1999-04-16

Likewise in the case at bar, not only did third-party plaintiffs make inconsistent pleadings regarding the authenticity of the signatures on the guaranties, but the basis of the entire case rests on the premise that the signatures are forged; if the guaranties were genuine, then Shelter would have no case against third-party plaintiffs and third-party plaintiffs would have no derivative case against third- party defendants. ... According to the ruling in Pioneer Bank, the trial court properly made the finding that the signatures on the guaranties were forged.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal of a pleading that lacks sufficient factual allegations to state a cause of action.

Shaker & Associates, Inc. v. Medical Technologies Group, Ltd. · filed 2000-06-30

In our view, the pleading is insufficient as a matter of law due to the lack of specificity therein. A trial court may grant a section 2 — 615 motion to dismiss a complaint that does not contain sufficient allegations of fact to state a cause of action. Singer v. Brookman, 217 Ill. App. 3d 870, 878, 578 N.E.2d 1, 5 (1991).

Section 2-615 permits dismissal when a complaint lacks sufficient factual allegations to state a cause of action.

Shaker & Associates, Inc. v. Advanced Multiuser Technologies Corp. · filed 2000-06-30

A trial court may grant a section 2-615 motion to dismiss a complaint that does not contain sufficient allegations of fact to state a cause of action.

Section 2-615 requires a plaintiff opposing dismissal to support a claim with specific factual allegations rather than mere conclusions.

Jackson v. South Holland Dodge, Inc. · filed 2001-07-26

In opposing a motion for dismissal under section 2-615 of the Code of Civil Procedure, a plaintiff cannot rely simply on mere conclusions of law or fact unsupported by specific factual allegations.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal of claims based on conclusions unsupported by specific factual allegations.

Evans v. Page · filed 2001-08-10

Nevertheless, plaintiffs remaining assertions — that he was denied a wheelchair-accessible library and wheelchair-accessible exercise and recreation services — constitute conclusions unsupported by specific factual allegations and were therefore properly dismissed under section 2 — 615 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

A complaint alleging damage caused by deception can survive a section 2-615 motion without pleading the exact dollar loss.

Chandler v. American General Finance, Inc. · filed 2002-03-27

Actual dollars lost by the Chandlers is a matter of proof, not pleading. ... Enough actual damage caused by the deception is alleged to defeat the section 2 — 615 motion to dismiss.

A complaint challenged under section 2-615 need not identify the source of each allegation.

Vorpagel v. Maxell Corp. of America · filed 2002-08-21

We are aware of no requirement that a plaintiff specifically identify the source of each allegation in a complaint.

Section 2-615 does not require a plaintiff to use the word “duty” if the complaint alleges facts that establish one.

Chandler v. Illinois Central Railroad · filed 2002-08-30

The trial court dismissed plaintiffs third amended complaint pursuant to section 2 — 615 of the Code because plaintiff failed to specifically allege a duty on the part of defendant to plaintiff. The better practice is to so allege specifically and to use the term “duty” in that allegation. We find, however, that a plaintiff need not plead the term “duty” for a duty to actually exist.

A complaint challenged under section 2-615 need not expressly use the word “duty” if its alleged facts establish one.

Chandler v. Illinois Central Railroad Co. · filed 2002-08-30

We find, however, that a plaintiff need not plead the term "duty" for a duty to actually exist.

Section 2-615 allows a court to strike allegations that state conclusions without well-pleaded supporting facts.

Raintree Homes, Inc. v. Village of Long Grove · filed 2002-11-22

When ruling on a section 2 — 615 motion to dismiss, the trial court should admit all well-pleaded facts as true and disregard legal and factual conclusions that are unsupported by allegations of fact. ... As none of the stricken paragraphs contained well-pleaded allegations of fact, the trial court did not err in striking them.

Section 2-615 requires a complaint to be legally and factually sufficient, with ultimate facts supporting the claim.

Edelman, Combs & Latturner v. Hinshaw & Culbertson · filed 2003-03-27

To survive a motion to dismiss pursuant to section 2 — 615, a complaint must be both legally and factually sufficient. ... Count V failed to set forth the ultimate facts of the claim and was properly dismissed.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal of a breach of contract count that fails to plead consideration, with an opportunity to amend the complaint to cure the defect.

Van Der Molen v. Washington Mutual Finance, Inc. · filed 2005-05-12

The complaint was presumably intended to be dismissed without prejudice to give him the opportunity to amend and solve the problem of lack of consideration. Count III of the second amended complaint does not appear to demonstrate consideration for the alleged promise to refund the prepayment penalty. The complaint identifies Judith Lundquist as the person making the alleged promise and Ken Jeffus as the person unilaterally revoking said alleged promise, but it does not plead any consideration. Whether the complaint could again be amended so as to demonstrate valid consideration will never be known, but the trial court was correct in its attempt to give Van Der Molen the opportunity to try.

Section 2-615 requires courts to accept well-pled facts as true while disregarding conclusions unsupported by factual allegations.

Sklodowski v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. · filed 2005-06-16

A motion under section 2 — 615 of the Code admits all well-pled facts as true and disregards legal and factual conclusions that are unsupported by factual allegations.

Section 2-615 allows dismissal of a complaint that is legally insufficient to state a cause of action.

Suburban 1, Inc. v. GHS MORTGAGE, LLC · filed 2005-07-20

A motion to dismiss a complaint pursuant to section 2 — 615 attacks the legal sufficiency of the complaint.

Under section 2-615, conclusory allegations cannot sustain a fraud claim without specific facts supporting the defendant’s knowledge of the alleged deception.

Addison v. Distinctive Homes, Ltd. · filed 2005-09-01

For plaintiffs to allege that defendants must have known that plans for the golf course were abandoned before each of them purchased their properties, with only vague assertions of fact as to exactly when the plans were abandoned, was conclusory and was insufficient to support the element of defendants’ knowing omission or concealment necessary to assert claims for common law fraud and consumer fraud. Accordingly, we find that the trial court was not in error in dismissing those counts in plaintiffs’ second amended complaint.

On a section 2-615 motion, a court accepts well-pleaded facts as true and draws reasonable inferences in the plaintiff’s favor.

Kelley v. Carbone · filed 2005-10-11

In ruling on a section 2 — 615 motion, a court must accept as true all well-pleaded facts in the complaint and draw all reasonable inferences favorable to the pleader.

Section 2-615 tests the legal sufficiency of a pleading while admitting its well-pleaded facts.

Buffa v. Haideri · filed 2005-11-16

Although a motion to dismiss (unlike a summary judgment motion) admits all well-pleaded facts and attacks the sufficiency of the complaint (Floyd v. Rockford Park District, 355 Ill. App. 3d 695, 699-700 (2005)), the counterclaim here does not allege that the Authority created an unnatural accumulation of ice or aggravated an existing hazard. As such, the counterclaim was legally insufficient and properly dismissed.

When reviewing a section 2-615 dismissal of an injunction complaint, courts take well-pleaded facts as true but do not resolve all inferences in the plaintiff’s favor.

Hadley v. Department of Corrections · filed 2005-12-13

Therefore, when reviewing the dismissal of a complaint for an injunction on the ground of legal insufficiency, we take the well-pleaded facts as true, but we do not resolve all inferences in the plaintiff's favor as we would do in other cases ( e.g., Feltmeier v. Feltmeier, 207 Ill.2d 263, 267, 278 Ill.Dec. 228, 798 N.E.2d 75, 79 (2003)).

Section 2-615 allows dismissal when defects on the face of a complaint make it legally insufficient.

Iseberg v. Gross · filed 2006-03-14

A motion to dismiss under section 2-615 of the Code challenges the legal sufficiency of the complaint by alleging defects on its face.

Section 2-615 motions test whether the pleadings sufficiently state a cause of action.

Krum v. Chicago National League Ball Club, Inc. · filed 2006-05-03

When reviewing motions to dismiss pursuant to section 2 — 615, we ask only whether the pleadings are sufficient to state a cause of action.

On a section 2-615 motion, courts accept well-pled facts as true, but unsupported conclusions do not suffice to state a claim.

Primax Recoveries, Inc. v. Atherton · filed 2006-05-04

Thus, we must treat all well-pled facts in Primax’s complaint as true. Well-pled facts are specific allegations of fact that bring a complaint within a recognized cause of action; mere conclusory allegations unsupported by specific facts will not suffice.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal when a complaint lacks facts that, if proven, would entitle the plaintiff to relief.

Zahl v. Krupa · filed 2006-05-31

The question presented on review of a motion to dismiss pursuant to section 2 — 615 is whether the complaint contains sufficient facts that, if established, would entitle the plaintiff to relief. ... Based on Denten and the principles of First Chicago, we hold that plaintiffs have pleaded facts that, if true, would prove that Krupa acted with the apparent authority of defendants in taking plaintiffs’ money pursuant to the investment agreements.

Section 2-615 asks whether the complaint alleges facts that, if proved, would entitle the plaintiff to relief.

Village of Roselle v. Commonwealth Edison Co. · filed 2006-11-07

In addressing a section 2 — 615 motion to dismiss, the relevant inquiry is whether the plaintiff has alleged sufficient facts that, if proved, would entitle the plaintiff to relief.

On a section 2-615 motion, courts accept well-pleaded facts and reasonable inferences as true, but need not accept unsupported legal or factual conclusions.

Time Savers, Inc. v. LaSalle Bank, NA · filed 2007-02-28

Next, because the sole issue in this appeal is whether the circuit court erred in dismissing TSFs complaint, pursuant to section 2 — 615 of the Code, our review is de novo. ... In reviewing the sufficiency of a complaint, we accept all well-pleaded facts and all reasonable inferences that may be drawn from those facts as true while viewing all allegations in the light most favorable to the plaintiff. ... Therefore, conclusions of law and conclusory factual allegations unsupported by specific facts are not deemed admitted.

Section 2-615 requires a complaint’s allegations to be viewed favorably to the plaintiff when deciding whether they state a cause of action.

DeCaro v. M. Felix, Inc. · filed 2007-03-09

“The question presented by a section 2 — 615 motion to dismiss is whether the allegations of the complaint, when viewed in a light most favorable to the plaintiff, are sufficient to state a cause of action upon which relief can be granted.” ... As the trial court ultimately may determine on remand that Lakeshore was not entitled to the full $83,000 redemption amount, Stewart Title’s amended complaint in intervention states a cause of action for unjust enrichment.

Section 2-615 motions test a complaint’s legal sufficiency and accept well-pleaded facts as true, but not unsupported conclusions.

Ottawa Savings Bank v. JDI Loans, Inc. · filed 2007-06-25

A section 2 — 615 motion admits as true all well-pleaded facts, but not conclusions of law or factual conclusions that are unsupported by allegations of specific facts.

Section 2-615 tests whether the facts alleged on the face of a complaint are legally sufficient to state a claim.

Redelmann v. Claire Sprayway, Inc. · filed 2007-08-16

Because “[a] section 2 — 615 motion to dismiss (735 ILCS 5/2— 615 (West 2002)) challenges the legal sufficiency of a complaint based on defects apparent on its face” (Marshall, 222 Ill. 2d at 429, citing Beretta U.S.A. Corp., 213 Ill. 2d at 364), we will focus on whether Redelmann has properly alleged the elements of a civil conspiracy.

Section 2-615 tests whether a complaint alleges enough facts to state a cause of action without deciding the merits.

People v. $280,020 United States Currency · filed 2007-04-20

The amended complaint set out facts as to each circumstance such that it survives a motion to dismiss under section 2-615.

Section 2-615 requires factual allegations sufficient to support a claim, but does not require the plaintiff to present evidence at the pleading stage.

Tyrka v. Glenview Ridge Condominium Association · filed 2014-06-20

Since the case at bar involved a section 2-615 motion to dismiss rather than a summary judgment motion as in both Goennenwein and Severson, plaintiffs here do not have to come forward with evidence but only with factual allegations.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal when a complaint offers only conclusory allegations without specific supporting facts.

Dennis v. Pace Suburban Bus Service · filed 2014-09-05

These types of allegations are entirely conclusory and, as such, they are insufficient to survive a 2-615 motion to dismiss.

Section 2-615 does not warrant dismissal when the complaint pleads the ultimate facts needed to state its claims.

Blevins v. Marcheschi · filed 2018-04-24

Because plaintiffs pled the necessary ultimate facts to bring their claims within the causes of action alleged, the original complaint was sufficient. We hold that the trial court erred in dismissing the original complaint pursuant to section 2-615.

Section 2-615 tests a complaint’s legal sufficiency on its face; a statutory preemption claim is not subject to a heightened standard for facial constitutional challenges.

WC Media, Inc. v. Village of Gilberts · filed 2020-08-18

This case, however, does not involve a constitutional challenge, and consequently, plaintiff’s pleading should not have been subjected to any heightened standard. ... A section 2-615 motion to dismiss attacks the legal sufficiency of a complaint on its face.

Section 2-615 requires sufficient factual allegations to state a claim, but a plaintiff need not plead the evidence supporting those allegations.

Avery v. GRI Fox Run, LLC · filed 2021-01-21

We disagree with defendants that the allegations lack specificity in that they do not specify the results of the testing (specifically, by how much the measurements exceeded the ordinance’s decibel limits) or the times of day the measurements were taken (which could identify the types of activities that generated the noises). As plaintiffs note, the law does not require plaintiffs to set forth evidence in their complaint.

Section 2-615 requires a complaint to allege facts supporting a claim; speculative allegations and unsupported legal conclusions do not suffice.

Kainrath v. Grider · filed 2021-12-23

A motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim is brought under section 2-615 of the Code and attacks the legal sufficiency of the complaint. ... Well pleaded facts are taken as true but conclusions of law unsupported by specific factual allegations are not. ... What is plainly lacking here is any unequivocal allegation of an agreement.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal when a complaint relies on conclusions unsupported by specific facts.

Valdez v. Illinois Casualty Company · filed 2022-08-01

Bare conclusions of law or conclusory factual allegations unsupported by specific facts are insufficient to withstand a section 2-615 motion to dismiss.

Section 2-615 requires facts supporting a claim; a conclusory allegation of duty is insufficient to survive dismissal.

Ward v. Kutak Rock, LLP · filed 2023-05-31

These are conclusions, not facts. Plaintiff’s amended complaint contains no facts suggesting that it was foreseeable to Kutak Rock that MacKelvie posed a risk of sexually harassing or assaulting female clients. Illinois is a fact-pleading jurisdiction, and it is not sufficient for plaintiff to simply recite that Kutak Rock had a duty of supervision without facts to support that claim.

On a section 2-615 motion, fraud claims must plead specific facts establishing the elements of fraud; conclusory allegations are insufficient.

Muhammad v. Bailey · filed 2024-09-25

A particularly high standard of specificity is required for fraud-based claims. ... A plaintiff must at least plead with sufficient particularity facts which establish the elements of fraud, including what representations were made, who made them, when they were made, and to whom they were made. ... In this case, the allegations of the operative complaint are insufficient to establish a cause of action for fraud.

A lost-profits claim must contain sufficient allegations of damages to survive a section 2-615 motion to dismiss.

Global Research Distribution, Inc. v. One Stop Mailing LLC · filed 2025-10-06

The amended complaint does not contain sufficient allegations of lost profits as damages sufficient to survive a section 2-615 motion to dismiss.

Section 2-615 requires a complaint to allege ultimate facts, but not the evidence supporting them, to survive dismissal.

Doe v. TK Behavioral, LLC · filed 2026-03-18

However, the pleader is not required to set forth her evidence in the complaint in order to survive a dismissal motion under section 2-615.

A complaint must allege facts establishing every essential element of a cause of action to survive a section 2-615 dismissal.

Simmons v. Sheriff · filed 2026-03-26

To survive a section 2-615 dismissal, Mr. Simmons had to allege facts that set out all essential elements of a cause of action, which he did not do.

A claim for tortious interference with prospective business relations must identify a prospective contracting party or clearly identified group and allege specific acts of interference to survive a section 2-615 motion.

Citylink Group, Ltd. v. Hyatt Corp. · filed 2000-05-12

Next, plaintiffs contend that the trial court erred in dismissing their claim for tortious interference with prospective business relations pursuant to section 2 — 615. ... We find that the trial court properly dismissed plaintiffs’ claim for interference with prospective business relations. The record shows that plaintiffs failed to: (1) specifically identify another Hyatt hotel from which they expected to receive a contract; (2) allege that any other clearly identified group was “contemplating prospective contractual arrangements” with plaintiffs; and (3) allege any specific acts of interference.

A complaint alleging an agency relationship must plead facts that, if proved, would establish that relationship to survive a section 2-615 motion.

Beckett v. H&R BLOCK, INC. · filed 1999-06-30

Whether particular circumstances exist that could establish an agency relationship is often a question of fact. However, a plaintiff “must still plead facts, which, if proved, could establish the existence of an agency relationship.” Knapp v. Hill, 276 Ill. App. 3d 376, 382, 657 N.E.2d 1068, 1072 (1995). The court was correct in finding that the plaintiffs failed to plead such facts.

A court deciding a section 2-615 motion considers the complaint’s allegations alone, without affidavits, affirmative factual defenses, or other supporting materials.

Oravek v. Community School District 146 · filed 1994-06-22

A court decides a section 2 — 615 motion solely upon the allegations of the complaint and not upon affidavits, affirmative factual defenses or other supporting materials.

Section 2-615 tests the facial sufficiency of a complaint, so affidavits cannot be considered on a motion under that section.

Curtis Casket Co. v. D.A. Brown & Co. · filed 1994-03-29

Affidavits may not be considered in a section 2 — 615 motion to dismiss, which challenges the facial sufficiency of the pleading; in contrast, such affidavits may be utilized in support of a section 2 — 619 motion (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1991, ch. 110, par. 2—619 (now 735 ILCS 5/2—619 (West 1992)) (section 2—619)).

Affidavits may not be considered in support of a section 2-615 motion attacking the sufficiency of a complaint.

In Re Marriage of Siegel · filed 1995-03-30

The affidavit was improper when presented in conjunction with his section 2-615 motion to dismiss. Accordingly, we find that it should have been stricken.

A section 2-615 motion is decided from the face of the pleading, with well-pleaded allegations taken as true.

Keating v. Estate of Golding · filed 1996-02-09

Although the evidence may eventually bear out the defendants’ position, a ruling on a motion for judgment under section 2 — 615 does not reach beyond the face of the pleading.

Section 2—615 does not permit dismissal based on an affirmative matter outside the complaint.

Spiegel v. Hollywood Towers Condominium Ass'n · filed 1996-06-11

We note that although the Association brought its motion to dismiss pursuant to section 2—615 of the Civil Practice Law (735 ILCS 5/2—615 (West 1992)), the motion asserted that the ordinance, was inapplicable to it. That defense is an affirmative matter extraneous to the complaint that may be brought only pursuant to section 2—619 (735 ILCS 5/2—619 (West 1992)). Accordingly, because of the extraneous information relied upon by the Association in its motion, we treat the motion as if brought under section 2—619.

Section 2-615 does not permit a motion to dismiss based on an affirmative matter extraneous to the complaint; that defense must be raised under section 2-619.

Spiegel v. HOLLYWOOD TOWERS CONDO. ASS'N · filed 1996-10-08

We note that although the Association brought its motion to dismiss pursuant to section 2-615 of the Civil Practice Law (735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 1992)), the motion asserted that the ordinance was inapplicable to it. That defense is an affirmative matter extraneous to the complaint that may be brought only pursuant to section 2-619 (735 ILCS 5/2-619 (West 1992)). Accordingly, because of the extraneous information relied upon by the Association in its motion, we treat the motion as if brought under section 2-619.

A section 2-615(a) motion addresses only defects on the face of the complaint.

Yu v. Kobayashi · filed 1996-06-19(a)

Moreover, while a section 2 — 615(a) motion concerns itself solely with defects on the face of the complaint (Kolegas v. Heftel Broadcasting Corp., 154 Ill. 2d 1, 8 (1992)), a section 2 — 619 proceeding enables the court to dismiss the complaint after considering issues of law or easily proved issues of fact (Goran v. Glieberman, 276 Ill. App. 3d 590, 592 (1995)).

A section 2-615 motion is decided from the pleadings, so a factual issue unresolved on that motion may be reconsidered when evidence is presented on summary judgment.

Norton v. City of Chicago · filed 1997-12-10

In Norton I, we held that the trial court could not conclude from the pleadings on the section 2 — 615 motion to dismiss that final judgments had been entered in traffic court. The ruling did not resolve the issue or preclude the trial court from reconsidering the question if the county presented evidence of final judgments on a motion for summary judgment.

On a section 2-615 motion, the court must consider exhibits incorporated into the complaint when assessing whether it states a claim.

Elson v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. · filed 1998-02-17

The court, in ruling on a section 2 — 615 motion, may not consider affidavits, the products of discovery, documentary evidence not incorporated into the pleadings as exhibits, testimonial evidence or other evidentiary materials. Barber-Colman Co. v. A&K Midwest Insulation Co., 236 Ill. App. 3d 1065, 603 N.E.2d 1215 (1992). In the present case, plaintiffs have incorporated several exhibits into their fifth amended complaint, primarily insurance documents, which must be considered when analyzing the sufficiency of the pleading.

Section 2-615 limits dismissal to defects on the face of the complaint; a defense requiring consideration beyond the complaint cannot support the motion.

Neppl v. Murphy · filed 2000-09-22

Since any consideration of whether the merger doctrine applies here necessarily requires that we go beyond the four corners of the complaint, the merger doctrine may not be considered in ruling on a section 2 — 615 motion.

A section 2-615 motion tests the pleadings alone; when the parties and trial court rely on affidavits, the motion may be treated as one for summary judgment absent prejudice.

Grobe v. Hollywood Casino-Aurora, Inc. · filed 2001-11-02

A section 2 — 615 motion challenges the action solely from the face of the pleadings. ... On appeal, this court will treat the motion as a motion for summary judgment, absent a showing of prejudice to the plaintiff.

Section 2-615 addresses whether a complaint states a cause of action; arguments requiring developed facts are more appropriate for summary judgment.

Smith v. Lane · filed 2005-07-13

We believe, however, that the defendants’ contentions and arguments are more appropriate to a summary judgment (735 ILCS 5/2 — 1005 (West 1996)) than a dismissal for the failure to state a cause of action (735 ILCS 5/2 — 615 (West 1996)).

Under section 2-615, an exhibit attached to a complaint controls over inconsistent allegations, and the complaint may be dismissed if the remaining allegations fail to state a claim.

Burton v. Airborne Express · filed 2006-08-08

A motion to dismiss under section 2-615 admits all well-pleaded facts but does not admit conclusions of law or conclusions of fact not supported by allegations of specific fact. ... We conclude that when the complaint is stripped of its allegations that are legally deficient (i.e., conclusional) and inconsistent (i.e., those which conflict with the contract attached to the complaint), the complaint fails to state a cause of action as a matter of law, and we affirm the circuit court's order dismissing it.