735 Ill. Comp. Stat. § 5/2-615

Section 2-615 permits a party to challenge all or part of a complaint and permits the court to terminate litigation in whole or in part.

Joiner v. SVM Management, LLC · filed 2021-02-09(a), (d)

The Code specifically permits a party to attack the entirety of a complaint or a “portion thereof” and allows the court “to terminate the litigation in whole or in part.”

Section 2-615 does not require a trial court to give reasons for granting a motion to dismiss.

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

More important, neither section 2-615 or 2-619 require the trial court to provide any reasoning in granting a motion to dismiss.

Section 2-615 does not apply to a motion to dismiss based on Participation Act immunity because the complaint alone cannot establish whether a lawsuit is a SLAPP.

First Financial Investment Fund III, LLC v. Johnson · filed 2021-09-22

However, section 2-615 does not apply to a motion to dismiss based on the Participation Act, as “it is impossible to determine whether a lawsuit is a SLAPP based solely on the face of the complaint because, when considering a motion to dismiss under section 2-615, [the court] must presume that all well-pled facts in the complaint are true.”

Section 2-615 permits a court to resolve a choice-of-law issue on a motion to dismiss when the complaint supplies the facts needed for that analysis.

A&R Logistics, Inc. v. American Zurich Insurance Co. · filed 2023-04-26

Defendants’ motion to dismiss and the circuit court’s order granting it cited only section 2-615. That approach was proper. ... While choice-of-law issues sometimes raise factual questions that must be addressed with materials outside the pleadings, that is not the case here.

A court may not dismiss a claim on its own under section 2-615 for a pleading deficiency without giving the plaintiff notice and an opportunity to amend.

Konrath v. Panko · filed 2023-06-27

Although the trial court’s written order stated that the dismissal of count I of the first amended complaint was based upon section 2-619 of the Code, the reasons for the trial court’s ruling, which were stated on the record, were clearly based upon section 2-615 of the Code—that no contract existed between plaintiff and defendants (presumably, the Pankos) and that the complaint failed to allege facts to support an award of specific performance. As plaintiff correctly notes, she was not given prior notice of a possible deficiency in count I, since defendants’ motion to dismiss as to that count was based solely upon section 2-619 of the Code, and was not given an opportunity to further amend count I to correct any deficiencies. We, thus, conclude that the trial court’s sua sponte dismissal of count I was erroneous.

A section 2-615 challenge that an affirmative defense is not legally recognized may be raised after judgment despite waiver of ordinary pleading defects.

In re Application of the County Treasurer & ex officio County Collector of Cook County · filed 2023-06-30

Indeed, this exception is equally applicable to motions to dismiss an affirmative defense under section 2-615. ... Because DJJ challenges whether Neldava raised a legally recognized defense, we review DJJ’s claim.

Denial of a section 2-615 motion establishes only that the pleading states a claim; it does not prevent the court from later finding that the evidence fails to prove the claim.

Lippitz v. Parad · filed 2023-09-26

We reject Parad’s contention that the section 2-615 order foreclosed the circuit court from later finding, at the close of evidence, that the AIP was not a binding, enforceable contract.

A section 2-615 motion tests whether the pleadings state a claim; the court cannot decide the claim’s merits on that motion.

In re Marriage of Ito · filed 2025-10-23

In this case, the circuit court clearly considered the merits of Nina’s motion for increase in child support despite the fact that the case was called only for consideration of Teruaki’s 2-615 motion to dismiss. This was improper.

On a section 2-615 motion to dismiss, the court accepts well-pleaded facts and reasonable inferences from those facts as true.

Doherty v. Kahn · filed 1997-06-18

In considering a motion to dismiss, a reviewing court must accept as true all well-pleaded facts alleged in the complaint and all reasonable inferences that can be drawn from those facts.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal based on unambiguous insurance policy language before discovery into the parties’ intent or reasonable expectations.

CC-Development Group, Inc. v. Evanston Insurance Co. · filed 2025-01-13

Here, the court granted Evanston and Landmark’s motions under section 2-615 of the Code of Civil Procedure. 735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 2022). ... There is no reason why a circuit court cannot dismiss on the basis of unambiguous policy language, without having to consider extrinsic evidence elicited in discovery.

A party must obtain leave of court to file a section 2-615 motion to dismiss in a small claims case.

Lewis v. Rice · filed 2026-04-15

However, leave of court is required for the filing of dismissal motions under sections 2-615 and 2-606.