735 Ill. Comp. Stat. § 5/2-615

Section 2 — 615 permits dismissal when the complaint’s allegations, viewed in the plaintiff’s favor, cannot establish a right to relief.

Ford v. Walker · filed 2007-11-05

A section 2 — 615 motion challenges the legal sufficiency of a complaint. Gilchrist v. Snyder, 351 Ill. App. 3d 639, 642, 814 N.E.2d 147, 150 (2004). Pursuant to that section, “[dismissal is appropriate only where, viewing the allegations in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, it is clear that no set of facts can be proved under the pleadings that will entitle the plaintiff to relief.” Gilchrist, 351 Ill. App. 3d at 642, 814 N.E.2d at 150.

Section 2-615(a) permits dismissal when the complaint’s allegations, viewed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, fail to state a claim for relief.

Ross v. May Co. · filed 2007-11-13(a)

In regard to plaintiffs promissory estoppel claim, review of the record and relevant case law indicates the trial court did not err in dismissing this claim pursuant to sections 2 — 615(a) and 2 — 619(a)(9) of the Code. ... The question to be decided when ruling on such a motion is whether the allegations of the complaint, when viewed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, are sufficient to state a cause of action upon which relief can be granted.

Section 2 — 615 tests whether a complaint states a cause of action upon which relief may be granted.

Record-A-Hit, Inc. v. National Fire Insurance · filed 2007-11-13

Because this matter was disposed of at the trial level pursuant to section 2 — 615 of the Code, the only question before this court is whether the plaintiffs complaint states a cause of action upon which relief might be granted.

Section 2-615(a) tests whether defects apparent on the face of a complaint make it legally insufficient to state a claim.

Ross v. May Company · filed 2007-11-13(a)

"A motion to dismiss brought pursuant to section 2-615(a) of the Code attacks the legal sufficiency of the complaint based on defects apparent on the face of the complaint." W.W. Vincent & Co. v. First Colony Life Insurance Co., 351 Ill. App. 3d 752, 756, 814 N.E.2d 960 (2004).

Section 2-615(a) tests whether defects apparent on the face of a complaint make it legally insufficient.

Irizarry v. Illinois Central Railroad Company · filed 2007-11-21(a)

A motion to dismiss under section 2-615(a) of the Code attacks the legal sufficiency of a plaintiff’s complaint by alleging defects appearing on its face.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal only when no set of facts provable under the pleadings would entitle the plaintiff to recover.

Imperial Apparel, Ltd. v. Cosmo's Designer Direct, Inc. · filed 2008-02-07

A cause of action should not be dismissed under section 2 — 615 unless it is clear that no set of facts can be proved under the pleadings that would entitle the plaintiff to recover.

Section 2–615 requires a court reviewing a complaint’s legal sufficiency to accept well-pleaded facts and reasonable inferences as true.

Imperial Design v. Cosmo's Designer Direct · filed 2008-02-07

Where, as here, the legal sufficiency of a complaint has been attacked under section 2–615 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/2–615 (West 2004)), a court must accept as true all well-pleaded facts contained in the complaint and all reasonable inferences that can be drawn from those facts.

Section 2-615 tests the legal sufficiency of a complaint; courts accept well-pleaded facts as true, draw reasonable inferences for the plaintiff, and dismiss only if no set of facts permits recovery.

Lozman v. Putnam · filed 2008-02-19

By contrast, a motion to dismiss under section 2 — 615 is a challenge to the legal sufficiency of the complaint. Iseberg, 366 Ill. App. 3d at 860. In reviewing the legal sufficiency of the complaint, we regard all well-pled facts as true and draw all reasonable inference in favor of the plaintiff. Iseberg, 366 Ill. App. 3d at 860. We construe the complaint liberally and dismiss only when it appears that plaintiffs could not recover under any set of facts. Iseberg, 366 Ill. App. 3d at 861.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal of a count that does not state a legally recognized claim for relief.

Willis v. Naico Real Estate Property and Management Corporation · filed 2008-02-19

Therefore, the trial court properly granted defendant’s section 2-615 motion to dismiss when it found that count IX "in substance is not a claim for relief, regardless of its merits."

Section 2 — 615 motions test only the legal sufficiency of a complaint.

Illinois Non-Profit Risk Management Ass'n v. Human Service Center of Southern Metro-East · filed 2008-01-09

A motion to dismiss under section 2 — 615 of the Procedure Code challenges only the legal sufficiency of the complaint.

Section 2-615 tests the legal sufficiency of a complaint.

Illinois Non-Profit Risk Management Association v. Human Services Center of Southern Metro-East · filed 2008-01-09

A motion to dismiss under section 2-615 of the Procedure Code challenges only the legal sufficiency of the complaint.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal for failure to state a claim only when the complaint lacks facts that, if true, could entitle the plaintiff to relief.

Pooh-Bah Enterprises, Inc. v. County of Cook · filed 2007-12-21

The only question presented by a section 2 — 615 motion to dismiss for failure to state a cause of action is whether sufficient facts are stated in the complaint which, if true, could entitle the plaintiff to relief.

Section 2-615 does not permit dismissal based on a disputed factual question about an insurer’s control of litigation.

Central Illinois Public Service Company v. Agricultural Insurance Company · filed 2008-01-14

Because control was a question of fact, and not law, a dismissal was inappropriate.

A section 2-615 motion tests whether the complaint’s allegations, viewed favorably to the plaintiff, state a cause of action.

Illinois Health Facilities Authority Ex Rel. Scachitti v. Morgan Stanley Dean Witter & Co. · filed 2008-04-03

The question presented by a section 2 — 615 motion to dismiss is whether the allegations of the complaint, viewed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, are sufficient to state a cause of action upon which relief can be granted.

Section 2-615 motions test whether a complaint is legally sufficient to state a claim.

Galvan v. Northwestern Memorial Hospital · filed 2008-04-14

A section 2-615 motion to dismiss challenges the legal sufficiency of a complaint.

Section 2-615 allows a motion to dismiss a complaint for legal insufficiency.

Falvan v. Northwestern Memorial Hospital · filed 2008-04-14

A section 2-615 motion to dismiss challenges the legal sufficiency of a complaint.

A section 2-615 motion challenges only the legal sufficiency of the complaint.

Loman v. Freeman · filed 2008-04-17

A motion to dismiss under section 2-615 of the Code (735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 2004)) challenges only the legal sufficiency of the complaint.

A section 2-615 motion tests whether the complaint’s allegations, taken as true and viewed in the plaintiff’s favor, sufficiently state a cause of action.

Fox v. Seiden · filed 2008-04-21

However, we need not address these arguments at this stage of the litigation because this appeal arises from the grant of a section 2 — 615 motion to dismiss; the only issue on appeal is whether the allegations in the complaint, taken as true and viewed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, are sufficient to state a cause of action upon which relief can be granted. Borowiec, 209 Ill. 2d at 382. As discussed above, the plaintiff’s amended complaint sets forth sufficient facts to plead the element of proximate cause. Consequently, the trial court erred in dismissing the amended complaint on that basis as well.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal when a complaint and its attached exhibits fail to support a viable damages claim.

Compton v. Country Mutual Insurance · filed 2008-04-29

A section 2 — 615 motion to dismiss attacks the legal sufficiency of the complaint based upon defects appearing on the face of the complaint. ... We conclude that the third amended complaint was properly dismissed for failure to state a cause of action in that the plaintiff failed to plead a viable damages claim.

Section 2-615 tests whether a complaint’s allegations and reasonable inferences, taken as true, state a cause of action.

Hnilica v. Rizza Chevrolet, Inc. · filed 2008-06-25

A motion to dismiss brought under section 2 — 615 of the Code of Civil Procedure tests the legal sufficiency of the complaint. ... For all of these reasons we find that the plaintiffs’ allegations in count II, together with the reasonable inferences to be drawn from those allegations, did state a cause of action under the Consumer Fraud Act, and therefore the trial court should not have dismissed that count.

Section 2-615 motions test the legal sufficiency of a complaint.

Hnilica v. Chevrolet · filed 2008-06-25

A motion to dismiss brought under section 2-615 of the Code of Civil Procedure tests the legal sufficiency of the complaint.

A section 2-615 motion cannot support dismissal when deciding the claim requires evidence beyond the complaint.

Baird & Warner Residential Sales, Inc. v. Mazzone · filed 2008-08-15

We are unable to determine, however, either the hardship that Mazzone would face or the effect on the general public if the nonsolicitation covenant were enforced as to the Lincoln Park office and/or the entire company without additional evidence that does not appear on the face of the complaint. Because the record in this case does not provide enough information to weigh those factors, we are unable to determine the reasonableness of the restrictive covenant. As such, we cannot hold that the restrictive covenant is unreasonable as a matter of law, and therefore, we must hold that the trial court erred in granting defendants’ section 2 — 615 motion to dismiss.

Section 2 — 615 permits dismissal when a complaint is legally insufficient on its face.

Downs v. Rosenthal Collins Group, L.L.C. · filed 2008-09-17

A motion to dismiss under section 2 — 615 of the Code of Civil Procedure challenges the legal sufficiency of a complaint based on facial defects of the complaint.

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

Beacham v. Walker · filed 2008-09-18

A section 2-615 motion to dismiss challenges the legal sufficiency of a complaint based on defects apparent on its face.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal when the plaintiff fails to state a cause of action upon which relief can be granted.

Board of Education v. Houlihan · filed 2008-05-06

A motion to dismiss under section 2 — 615 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/2 — 615 (West 2006)) is properly granted where the plaintiff fails to state a cause of action upon which relief can be granted.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal when a complaint, viewed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, fails to state a cause of action.

McCready v. Illinois Secretary of State · filed 2008-05-15

A section 2 — 615 motion to dismiss should be granted if, after viewing the allegations in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, the complaint fails to state a cause of action on which relief can be granted.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal only when no set of provable facts would entitle the plaintiff to relief.

Napleton v. Village of Hinsdale · filed 2008-06-05

A claim should not be dismissed pursuant to section 2 — 615 unless no set of facts can be proved which would entitle the plaintiff to recover.

On a section 2-615 motion, the court accepts well-pleaded facts as true and disregards unsupported legal and factual conclusions.

Green v. Rogers · filed 2008-07-30

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.

Section 2-615 tests whether the complaint’s allegations, viewed in the plaintiff’s favor, state a cause of action.

Springfield Heating and Air Conditioning, Inc. v. 3947-55 KING DR. AT OAKWOOD, LLC · filed 2009-01-15

In reviewing a trial court’s granting of a section 2 — 615 motion to dismiss, the question this court must address “is whether the allegations in 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.”

Section 2-615 requires a complaint to allege facts sufficient to state a legally recognized claim; liberal construction cannot cure a failure to plead those facts.

Laubner v. JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A. · filed 2008-11-21

However, the general policy favoring a liberal construction of the pleadings as described in Canel cannot cure a plaintiff’s failure to set forth well-pleaded facts.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal of a breach of contract claim that fails to plead the plaintiff’s performance and specific damages.

Akinyemi v. JP Morgan Chase Bank, NA · filed 2009-05-08

Because he failed to allege that he fulfilled all his obligations under the contract and because he failed to specifically allege the damages he incurred, we find that plaintiff did not plead a proper breach of contract claim and, accordingly, dismissal of his amended complaint was appropriate under section 2-615.

Section 2-615 tests a pleading’s legal sufficiency, taking well-pleaded facts as true and reading the allegations in the pleader’s favor.

Country Mutual Insurance v. Olsak · filed 2009-05-13

A motion to dismiss pursuant to section 2 — 615 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/2 — 615 (West 2004)) attacks the legal sufficiency of the complaint. DOD Technologies v. Mesirow Insurance Services, Inc., 381 Ill. App. 3d 1042, 1045 (2008), citing R&B Kapital Development, LLC v. North Shore Community Bank & Trust Co., 358 Ill. App. 3d 912, 920 (2005). A court reviewing an order granting a section 2 — 615 motion takes all well-pled facts as true. DOD Technologies, 381 Ill. App. 3d at 1046. ... We conclude that the trial court erred when it granted summary judgment on Country Mutual’s complaint and defendants’ counterclaim and dismissed with prejudice the second amended affirmative defenses.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal for legal insufficiency only when no provable set of facts would entitle the plaintiff to recovery.

In Re Estate of Lieberman · filed 2009-05-28(a)

Therefore, pursuant to section 2-615, a court should not dismiss a cause of action unless it is clearly apparent that no set of facts can be proved that would entitle the plaintiff to recovery.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal for pleading defects only when it is clear that no provable facts would entitle the plaintiff to recovery.

Collins v. Northern Trust Co. · filed 2009-05-28(a)

Therefore, pursuant to section 2 — 615, a court should not dismiss a cause of action unless it is clearly apparent that no set of facts can be proved that would entitle the plaintiff to recovery.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal when a pleading fails to allege the essential elements of a cause of action.

Covinsky v. Hannah Marine Corp. · filed 2009-02-17

Instead, he attempted to negate the essential elements of the breach of fiduciary duty claim as would be appropriate under section 2 — 615. The court was correct in granting the motion to dismiss pursuant to section 2 — 615.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal only when a complaint fails to state a cause of action after its well-pleaded facts and reasonable inferences are taken as true.

Hanna v. City of Chicago · filed 2009-03-06

We find that the allegations in plaintiffs’ complaint regarding the vagueness of the Ordinance are sufficient to establish a cause of action and should not have been dismissed on the pleadings by the trial court. Accordingly, we reverse the trial court’s decision to dismiss count I pursuant to section 2 — 615.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal when a liberally construed complaint fails to state a valid cause of action, even with its well-pleaded facts and reasonable inferences taken in the plaintiff’s favor.

Turnipseed v. Brown · filed 2009-05-04

We construe the claim liberally and find it insufficient only when it appears that plaintiffs could not recover under any set of facts.

Section 2-615 tests whether a complaint’s allegations, taken as true and viewed favorably to the plaintiff, state a cause of action.

Turner v. Memorial Medical Center · filed 2009-06-18

A section 2 — 615 motion to dismiss (735 ILCS 5/2— 615 (West 2006)) attacks the legal sufficiency of a complaint. The motion does not raise affirmative defenses, but rather alleges only defects on the face of the complaint. The question presented by a section 2 — 615 motion to dismiss is whether the allegations of the complaint, when taken as true and viewed in a light most favorable to the plaintiff, are sufficient to state a cause of action upon which relief can be granted.

Section 2-615 requires courts reviewing a dismissal to accept the complaint’s allegations as true and determine whether they state a cause of action when read in the plaintiff’s favor.

Bernstein v. Department of Human Services · filed 2009-06-19

When analyzing the propriety of a dismissal under section 2 — 615 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/2 — 615 (West 2006)), we accept the allegations in plaintiffs complaint as true and determine whether those allegations, construed in a light most favorable to plaintiff, sufficiently establish a cause of action upon which relief may be granted.

Section 2-615 tests whether the facts alleged in a complaint, taken as true, state a legally sufficient cause of action.

LaSalle Bank National Ass'n v. City of Oakbrook Terrace · filed 2009-07-22

A section 2 — 615 motion attacks the legal sufficiency of the complaint, based on defects apparent on its face.

Section 2-615 tests whether a complaint is legally sufficient to state a cause of action.

K. Miller Const. Co., Inc. v. McGinnis · filed 2009-08-10

A section 2-615 motion to dismiss challenges the legal sufficiency of a complaint.

Section 2-615 permits a motion to dismiss that challenges the legal sufficiency of a complaint based on defects apparent on its face.

Wilson v. Cook County · filed 2009-08-19

A motion to dismiss under section 2 — 615 of the Code of Civil Procedure challenges the legal sufficiency of a complaint based on facial defects of the complaint.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal only when it is clearly apparent that no set of provable facts would entitle the plaintiff to relief.

Pooh-Bah Enterprises, Inc. v. County of Cook · filed 2009-03-19

A cause of action should not be dismissed pursuant to a section 2 — 615 motion unless it is clearly apparent that no set of facts can be proved that would entitle the plaintiff to relief.

A section 2-615 motion should be denied unless it is clear that no set of provable facts would entitle the plaintiff to recover.

Strickland v. Kotecki · filed 2009-07-15

A section 2 — 615 motion should not be granted unless it clearly appears that no set of facts could ever be proved that would entitle the plaintiffs to recover.

Section 2-615 motions test a complaint’s legal sufficiency based on defects apparent on its face.

Tedrick v. Community Resource Center, Inc. · filed 2009-09-24

A section 2 — 615 motion to dismiss challenges the legal sufficiency of a complaint based on defects apparent on its face.

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

Country Mutual Insurance v. D & M Tile, Inc. · filed 2009-09-29(a)

The defendants also claim that the trial court erred by denying their motions to strike portions of the complaint pursuant to section 2-615(a) of the Code of Civil Procedure. ... "A section 2-615 motion admits all well-pleaded facts and attacks the legal sufficiency of the complaint * * *." ... We find that Country Mutual alleged facts sufficient to support its claim that Walenga was a bona fide officer of D and M who voluntarily elected to withdraw from coverage under the Act. Therefore, the trial court did not err by denying the defendants' motions to strike.

A section 2-615(a) motion tests the legal sufficiency of a complaint.

Kean v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. · filed 2009-11-19(a)

A motion to dismiss under section 2 — 615(a) of the Code (735 ILCS 5/2 — 615(a) (West 2006)) tests the legal sufficiency of the complaint, whereas a motion to dismiss under section 2 — 619(a) of the Code (735 ILCS 5/2— 619(a) (West 2006)) admits the legal sufficiency of the complaint, but asserts affirmative matter outside the complaint that defeats the cause of action.

Section 2-615 permits a motion to dismiss that challenges the legal sufficiency of a complaint.

Dloogatch v. Brincat - Corrected 01/15/10 · filed 2009-12-16

Pursuant to section 2-615 of the Illinois Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 2006)), a motion to dismiss challenges the legal sufficiency of the complaint.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal only when the pleadings show that no provable set of facts would entitle the plaintiff to relief.

McGoey v. Brace · filed 2009-10-16

A defendant’s section 2 — 615 motion to dismiss should only be granted where it appears that no set of facts can be proven under the pleadings that would entitle plaintiff to relief.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal only when it is clearly apparent that no set of facts could entitle the plaintiff to recovery.

Dloogatch v. Brincat · filed 2009-12-16

A cause of action should not be dismissed under section 2-615 unless it is clearly apparent that no set of facts can be proved that would entitle the plaintiff to recovery.

Section 2-615 tests whether a complaint states a cause of action, taking its well-pleaded allegations as true and reading them in the plaintiff’s favor.

Uhlich Children's Advantage Network v. National Union Fire Co. of Pittsburgh · filed 2010-02-03

On review of a section 2 — 615 dismissal, the court must determine whether the allegations of the complaint, when interpreted in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, sufficiently set forth a cause of action on which relief may be granted.

A section 2-615 motion tests the legal sufficiency of a complaint, taking its well-pleaded facts and reasonable inferences as true.

Apollo Real Estate Investment Fund, IV, L.P. v. Gelber · filed 2010-02-11

A motion to dismiss brought under section 2 — 615 tests the legal sufficiency of the complaint. In ruling on a section 2 — 615 motion, a court must accept as true all well-pleaded facts in the complaint and all reasonable inferences therefrom.

Section 2-615 tests the legal sufficiency of a complaint; well-pleaded facts are taken as true, and dismissal is proper only when the plaintiff cannot recover under any set of facts.

Sheffler v. Commonwealth Edison Co. · filed 2010-02-26

A motion to dismiss under section 2 — 615 of the Code (735 ILCS 5/2 — 615 (West 2006)) is a challenge to the legal sufficiency of the complaint. ... We construe the complaint liberally and dismiss only when it appears that plaintiffs cannot recover under any set of facts. ... Based upon the foregoing, the trial court did not err by dismissing plaintiffs’ claims for injunctive relief, including those claims pertaining to the life-support equipment registry with prejudice.

A section 2-615 motion tests whether a complaint is legally sufficient.

Sheffler v. Commonwealth Edison Company · filed 2010-02-26

A motion to dismiss under section 2-615 of the Code (735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 2006)) is a challenge to the legal sufficiency of the complaint.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal when a complaint lacks facts sufficient to state a cause of action, with its allegations construed in the plaintiff’s favor.

Kaczka v. Retirement Board of the Policemen's Annuity and Benefit Fund · filed 2010-03-02

A section 2-615 motion to dismiss tests the legal sufficiency of the complaint. ... Here, plaintiff has not pled any facts to support the conclusion that there were others situated similarly to him. He does not allege that any of the other 34 people whose pensions were reinstated had been married for less than one year when their spouses died. Accordingly, the circuit court properly granted the Board’s motion to dismiss count II of the amended complaint.

Section 2-615 does not permit dismissal when a complaint pleads facts that, if proven, would entitle the plaintiff to relief.

Horwitz v. Sonnenschein Nath & Rosenthal, LLP · filed 2010-03-26

In summary, we conclude the trial court erred in dismissing plaintiffs amended complaint under section 2 — 615 of the Code (735 ILCS 5/2 — 615 (West 2008)) because the paragraphs from plaintiffs amended complaint we have cited pled sufficient facts that, if proven, would entitle plaintiff to relief.

Section 2-615 tests whether a complaint states a cause of action, taking well-pleaded facts as true and construing the allegations in the plaintiff’s favor.

Fitch v. McDermott, Will and Emery, LLP · filed 2010-04-28

When we review the legal sufficiency of a claim under section 2 — 615, we take as true all well-pleaded facts in the complaint and determine whether the allegations, construed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, are sufficient to establish a cause of action upon which relief may be granted.

A section 2-615 motion tests whether well-pleaded facts, accepted as true and viewed in the plaintiff's favor, state a cause of action.

Peters v. Herrin Community School District No. 4 · filed 2010-05-19

As previously set forth, a section 2-615 motion admits the truth of all well-pleaded facts and the allegations are viewed in the light most favorable to plaintiff. From our review of the record, we believe that the trial court erred in dismissing plaintiff's complaint because the allegation that Gene had been instructed by the coaching staff to encounter the hazard was sufficient to support a cause of action for willful and wanton conduct.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal when a complaint fails to allege facts supporting a cause of action that would entitle the plaintiff to relief.

Dopkeen v. Whitaker · filed 2010-03-10

Our review of a dismissal pursuant to both sections 2-615 and 2-619 is 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. ... Under either section, dismissal is proper if the plaintiff fails to allege any set of facts to support a cause of action that would entitle him to relief.

Section 2 — 615 permits dismissal when a complaint, viewed in the plaintiff’s favor, cannot state a cause of action under any provable set of facts.

Jackson v. County of Kane · filed 2010-03-31

A section 2 — 615 motion presents the question whether a complaint’s allegations, viewed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, are sufficient to state a cause of action upon which relief may be granted. The motion should be granted only if no set of facts could be proved that would entitle the plaintiff to recover.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal when a complaint fails to state a cause of action after its well-pleaded facts and reasonable inferences are accepted as true.

Bowers v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Agency · filed 2010-07-09

Here, accepting as true all well-pleaded facts and reasonable inferences drawn therefrom, we find that plaintiff failed to sufficiently state a cause of action and, accordingly, the trial court did not err in dismissing this claim pursuant to defendant’s section 2-615 motion to dismiss.

On a section 2-615 motion to dismiss for failure to state a cause of action, the court must view the pleadings and supporting documents in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party.

Westfield Ins. Co. v. BIRKEY'S FARM STORE · filed 2010-03-17

When a trial court rules upon a motion to dismiss a complaint either for failure to state a cause of action (735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 2008)) or because the claims raised in the complaint are barred by other affirmative matter that avoids the legal effect of or defeats the claim (735 ILCS 5/2-619(a)(9) (West 2008)), it must interpret all of the pleadings and the supporting documents in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party.

Section 2-615 requires courts to read pleadings in the plaintiff’s favor and permits dismissal only if no set of facts would support a cause of action; review is de novo.

Carlton at the Lake, Inc. v. Barber · filed 2010-05-20

“When ruling on a motion to dismiss, either for failure to state a cause of action [section 2 — 615] or because the claims are barred by other affirmative matter that avoids the legal effect of or defeats the claim [section 2 — 619(a)(9)], the trial court must interpret all pleadings and supporting documents in the light most favorable to the non-moving party.” In re Chicago Flood Litigation, 176 Ill. 2d 179, 189 (1997). The court should grant the motion only if the plaintiff can prove no set of facts that would support a cause of action, and our review is de novo. In re Chicago Flood, 176 Ill. 2d at 189.

Section 2-615 dismissals are reviewed de novo; courts accept well-pleaded facts as true and construe the complaint in the plaintiff’s favor.

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

We review an order granting a section 2 — 615 motion to dismiss de novo. ... “In reviewing the sufficiency of a complaint, a court must accept as true all well-pleaded facts and all reasonable inferences that may be drawn from those facts.” Heastie, 226 Ill. 2d at 531. A court must also construe the allegations in the complaint in the light most favorable to the plaintiff and should not dismiss a cause of action “unless it is clearly apparent that no set of facts can be proved that would entitle the plaintiff to recovery.”

Section 2-615 allows dismissal only when the complaint’s facts and reasonable inferences could not entitle the plaintiff to recovery.

Pickel v. SPRINGFIELD STALLIONS, INC. · filed 2010-03-23

It follows that a court should not grant a motion for dismissal pursuant to section 2 — 615 unless it is clear, from the factual allegations and the reasonably permissible inferences therefrom, that no set of facts could be proved that would entitle the plaintiff to recovery under the law.

Section 2-615 motions test whether a complaint is legally sufficient based on defects apparent on its face.

PANKROS v. Tyler · filed 2010-05-21

A motion to dismiss under section 2 — 615 of the Code (735 ILCS 5/2 — 615 (West 2008)) challenges the legal sufficiency of the complaint by alleging defects on its face.

Section 2-615 tests whether a complaint alleges facts sufficient to state a cause of action.

Weidner v. Karlin · filed 2010-07-06(a)

Neither the written motion nor any oral motion asserted that any affirmative matter defeated the claim. Thus, we will determine whether the trial court properly dismissed counts III and IV under section 2 — 615.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal when a complaint, viewed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, fails to state a cause of action on which relief can be granted.

YPI 180 N. LaSalle Owner v. 180 N. LaSalle II · filed 2010-07-19

A section 2-615 motion to dismiss attacks the legal sufficiency of the complaint and should be granted if, after viewing the allegations in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, the complaint fails to state a cause of action on which relief can be granted.

Section 2-615 tests whether a complaint’s well-pleaded facts state a legally sufficient claim.

Randle v. Americash Loans, LLC · filed 2010-07-30

A motion to dismiss based on section 2-615 of the Illinois Code of Civil Procedure admits all well-pleaded facts and attacks the legal sufficiency of the complaint. ... Thus, we find that plaintiff sufficiently stated a claim that AmeriCash took a security interest in her checking account.

Section 2-615 motions test whether a complaint is legally sufficient.

Citizens Opposing Pollution v. Exxonmobil Coal U.S.A. · filed 2010-09-24

A motion to dismiss under section 2 — 615 tests the legal sufficiency of the complaint whereas a motion to dismiss under section 2 — 619 admits the legal sufficiency of the complaint but asserts an affirmative defense outside the complaint that serves to defeat the cause of action.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal when a complaint fails to state a legally sufficient cause of action.

Rajterowski v. City of Sycamore · filed 2010-11-01

A motion to dismiss pursuant to section 2 — 615 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/2 — 615 (West 2008)) challenges only the complaint’s legal sufficiency. Napleton v. Village of Hinsdale, 229 Ill. 2d 296, 305 (2008); DeWoskin v. Loew’s Chicago Cinema, Inc., 306 Ill. App. 3d 504, 513 (1999) (legal sufficiency of complaint alleging constitutional violations may be raised by section 2 — 615 motion).

Section 2-615 tests whether a pleading is legally sufficient while accepting its well-pleaded facts as true.

RBS Citizens, National Ass'n v. RTG-Oak Lawn, LLC · filed 2011-02-03

A motion to dismiss under section 2-615 admits all well-pleaded facts and attacks the legal sufficiency of the complaint.

Section 2-615 confines review of a motion to dismiss to the complaint and its attachments, and dismissal is proper only if no provable facts would entitle the plaintiff to relief.

People v. Kane · filed 2010-09-10

In deciding a section 2 — 615 motion, a court is confined to matters within “the four corners of the complaint” (Krueger v. Lewis, 342 Ill. App. 3d 467, 471 (2003)) and its attachments. ... On our de novo review, confining our inquiry to the petition and the attachments, we cannot say that no set of facts could ever be proved that would entitle defendant to relief.

Section 2 — 615 tests whether a complaint’s allegations, viewed in the plaintiff’s favor, state a cause of action.

Advanced Concepts Chicago, Inc. v. CDW Corp. · filed 2010-11-04

Thus, the question that is presented by a section 2 — 615 motion 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 may be granted. Canel, 212 Ill. 2d at 317. ... Thus, Advanced alleged facts sufficient to state a cause of action as a third-party beneficiary of the contract between McCormick and Berbee and the trial court erred in granting the section 2 — 615 motion to dismiss.

Section 2-615 tests the legal sufficiency of a complaint; a negligence complaint that fails to allege a duty owed to the plaintiff may be dismissed.

Rojas Concrete, Inc. v. Flood Testing Laboratories, Inc. · filed 2010-12-15

A motion to dismiss pursuant to section 2 — 615 of the Code tests the legal sufficiency of a complaint, whereas a section 2 — 619 motion admits the legal sufficiency of the complaint but asserts affirmative matter outside of the complaint which defeats the claim.

Section 2-615 tests a complaint’s legal sufficiency; courts construe the complaint liberally and dismiss only when the plaintiff cannot recover under any set of facts.

Benson v. Stafford · filed 2010-12-23

A motion to dismiss under section 2—615 of the Code (735 ILCS 5/2—615 (West 2008)) is a challenge to the legal sufficiency of the complaint. ... We construe the complaint liberally and dismiss only when it appears that plaintiffs cannot recover under any set of facts.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal for legal insufficiency only when a liberally construed complaint cannot support recovery under any set of facts.

Herlehy v. Marie v. Bistersky Trust Dated May 5, 1989 · filed 2010-12-23

We construe the complaint liberally and dismiss only when it appears that plaintiffs cannot recover under any set of facts.

A section 2-615 motion tests whether the complaint’s allegations, viewed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, state a cause of action.

Travel Express Aviation Maintenance, Inc. v. Bridgeview Bank Group · filed 2011-01-13

A section 2 — 615 motion to dismiss attacks the legal sufficiency of the complaint. We must determine whether the allegations, when construed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, sufficiently state a cause of action upon which relief can be granted.

Section 2-615 motions challenge the legal sufficiency of a complaint and admit its well-pleaded facts.

Pielet v. Hiffman · filed 2011-01-20

A motion to dismiss under section 2—615 admits all well-pleaded facts and attacks the legal sufficiency of the complaint.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal when a complaint fails to state a cause of action, including when the alleged facts establish no duty or proximate cause.

Herlehy v. Marie v. Bistersky Trust · filed 2010-12-23

Dismissal was also proper under section 2—615 because plaintiffs failed to state a cause of action for breach of fiduciary duty because LaGrange Bank had no duty to plaintiffs and even if LaGrange Bank assumed a voluntary duty, it was not the proximate cause of plaintiffs’ damages as a matter of law.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal when no set of facts, if proven, would entitle the plaintiff to recovery.

Cooney v. Chicago Public Schools · filed 2010-12-30

A complaint is properly dismissed under section 2-615 of the Code where there is no set of facts that if proven would entitle the plaintiff to recovery.

Section 2-615 admits well-pleaded facts and tests whether a complaint states a legally sufficient claim.

Seip v. Rogers Raw Materials Fund, L.P. · filed 2011-03-10

A motion to dismiss under section 2 — 615 admits all well-pleaded facts and attacks the legal sufficiency of the complaint.

A section 2—615 motion tests the legal sufficiency of a complaint, taking its well-pleaded facts as true.

Herrera-Corral v. Hyman · filed 2011-03-31

A section 2—615 motion to dismiss challenges the legal sufficiency of a complaint. All well-pleaded facts alleged in the complaint are taken as true.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal of a complaint that fails to state a viable cause of action.

Riley Acquisitions, Inc. v. Drexler · filed 2011-03-08

Because defendant did not state a viable cause of action in her third-party complaint, we affirm the circuit court's order dismissing the third-party complaint under section 2-615 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 2008)).

Section 2-615 permits dismissal for failure to state a cause of action only when no facts provable under the pleadings could entitle the plaintiff to relief.

Bonhomme v. St. James · filed 2011-03-10

A complaint should be dismissed under section 2-615 for failure to state a cause of action only when it clearly appears that no set of facts could be proved under the pleadings that would entitle the plaintiff to relief.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal of a complaint that fails to state a viable cause of action.

Riley Acquisitions, Inc. v. Drexler · filed 2011-04-05

Because defendant did not state a viable cause of action in her third-party complaint, we affirm the circuit court's order dismissing the third-party complaint under section 2-615 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 2008)).

Section 2-615 asks whether the complaint states a cause of action upon which relief can be granted.

Salce v. Saracco · filed 2011-05-12(a)

When dismissal is sought pursuant to section 2 — 615 of the Code, the only issue before the court is whether the complaint or a particular count thereof states a cause of action upon which relief can be granted.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal when a pleading lacks facts sufficient to state a cause of action, including required allegations of damages.

Palmolive Tower Condominiums, LLC v. Simon · filed 2011-05-16

A motion to dismiss pursuant to section 2 — 615 of the Code attacks the legal sufficiency of a complaint by alleging defects appearing on the face of the complaint. ... Such a motion should be granted if the complaint does not allege sufficient facts to state a cause of action. ... As a result, we agree with the circuit court that the defendants failed to allege damages and that their counterclaims should have been dismissed.

Section 2-615 requires courts to read complaint allegations in the plaintiff’s favor and dismiss only if they fail to state a cause of action.

Janis v. Graham · filed 2011-03-10

On review of a section 2—615 dismissal, this court must determine whether the allegations contained in the complaint, when interpreted in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, sufficiently set forth a cause of action on which relief may be granted.

On a section 2-615 motion, the court accepts well-pleaded facts and reasonable inferences as true when assessing the complaint's legal sufficiency.

Clark v. Children's Memorial Hosp. · filed 2011-05-06

In ruling on a section 2-615 motion, we accept as true all well-pleaded facts in the complaint and all reasonable inferences therefrom.

Section 2-615 motions challenge a complaint’s legal sufficiency based on defects apparent on its face.

Clark v. Children's Memorial Hospital · filed 2011-05-06

A motion to dismiss pursuant to section 2-615 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 2006)) challenges the legal sufficiency of the complaint by alleging defects on the face of the complaint.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal of a counterclaim that fails to allege facts establishing an essential element, such as damages.

Palmolive Tower Condominiums v. Simon · filed 2011-05-16

A motion to dismiss pursuant to section 2-615 of the Code attacks the legal sufficiency of a complaint by alleging defects appearing on the face of the complaint. ... As a result, we agree with the circuit court that the defendants failed to allege damages and that their counterclaims should have been dismissed.

Section 2-615 tests a complaint's legal sufficiency on its face, and dismissal is improper when disputed facts may entitle the plaintiff to relief.

Kindel v. Tennis · filed 2011-05-25

Accordingly, we cannot agree with the circuit court that a dismissal pursuant to section 2-615 was appropriate in this case.

Section 2-615 requires a court reviewing dismissal to read the complaint in the plaintiff's favor and decide whether its allegations state a cause of action.

Tilschner v. Spangler · filed 2011-05-06

On review of a dismissal pursuant to section 2-615, this court must determine whether the allegations of the complaint, when interpreted in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, sufficiently set forth a cause of action on which relief may be granted.

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

Bell v. Hutsell · filed 2011-05-19

A motion to dismiss, pursuant to section 2-615 of the Code, challenges the legal sufficiency of a complaint based on defects apparent on its face.

Section 2-615 does not permit dismissal based on disputed facts when the complaint states a legally sufficient claim.

Kindel v. Tennis · filed 2011-06-10

Although the defendants contend in the case at bar that it was a part of the plaintiffs job to care for the bull that attacked him and that the bull was in the plaintiffs custody and care at the time of the attack, the plaintiff disputes that and has done so from his first pleading onward. Accordingly, we cannot agree with the circuit court that a dismissal pursuant to section 2 — 615 was appropriate in this case.

Section 2-615(a) permits dismissal when the plaintiff can prove no set of facts that would entitle the plaintiff to recover.

STATE FARM MUT. AUTO. v. Du Page County · filed 2011-06-16(a)

A section 2-615 motion to dismiss, on the other hand, should be granted where the plaintiff can prove no set of facts that would entitle him to recover.

Section 2-615 tests whether a complaint’s allegations, viewed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, state a cause of action.

Asset Exchange II. LLC v. First Choice Bank · filed 2011-07-12

A section 2-615 motion to dismiss tests the legal sufficiency of the complaint.

Section 2-615 governs motions challenging a pleading's legal sufficiency, even when a motion cites a different provision.

DUPREE v. Hardy · filed 2011-07-20

We first note that although Walker's October 2009 motion to dismiss was brought under section 2-619(a)(9) of the Civil Code, Walker argued that Dupree's mandamus petition was legally insufficient, which is a proper challenge under section 2-615 of the Civil Code. Thus, we review the substance of both motions to dismiss under section 2-615 of the Civil Code.

Section 2-615 allows dismissal when the complaint’s well-pleaded facts, taken as true and construed in the plaintiff’s favor, do not state a cause of action.

Thurman v. Champaign Park Dist. · filed 2011-08-10(a)

In the context of a section 2-615 motion to dismiss, "[t]he proper inquiry is whether the well-pleaded facts of the complaint, taken as true and construed in a light most favorable to the plaintiff, are sufficient to state a cause of action upon which relief may be granted." ... We disagree with plaintiffs and find the trial court committed no error in dismissing their complaint pursuant to section 2-615.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal when a complaint lacks sufficient facts to state a cause of action for willful and wanton conduct.

Thurman v. Champaign Park District · filed 2011-08-10

We disagree with plaintiffs and find the trial court committed no error in dismissing their complaint pursuant to section 2-615.

A section 2-615 motion challenges whether the complaint is legally sufficient on its face.

Gatreaux v. DKW ENTERPRISES, LLC · filed 2011-09-22

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

Section 2-615 permits dismissal when a complaint is legally insufficient on its face.

Hanks v. Cotler · filed 2011-09-29

A motion to dismiss under section 2-615 of the Code attacks the legal sufficiency of a complaint, and only attacks the face of the complaint.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal when a complaint’s well-pleaded allegations, read in the plaintiff’s favor, do not state a cause of action.

AP Properties, Inc. v. Rattner · filed 2011-10-27

The trial court dismissed the amended complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. See 735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 2010). ... We ask whether the complaint's well-pleaded allegations, construed in the light most favorable to plaintiff, are sufficient to state a cause of action upon which relief may be granted.

Under section 2-615, dismissal is reviewed de novo by asking whether the complaint’s well-pleaded allegations, construed in the plaintiff’s favor, state a cause of action.

A.P. Properties v. Rattner · filed 2011-10-27

The trial court dismissed the amended complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. See 735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 2010). Our review is de novo. Sherman v. Township High School District 214, 404 Ill. App. 3d 1101, 1107 (2010). We ask whether the complaint’s well-pleaded allegations, construed in the light most favorable to plaintiff, are sufficient to state a cause of action upon which relief may be granted.

Section 2-615 tests whether a complaint’s well-pleaded facts, taken as true and construed favorably to the plaintiff, state a cause of action.

Kerbes v. Raceway Associates, LLC · filed 2011-11-21

A motion to dismiss pursuant to section 2-615 of the Code attacks the legal sufficiency of the complaint. ... "The proper inquiry is whether the well-pleaded facts of the complaint, taken as true and construed in a light most favorable to the plaintiff, are sufficient to state a cause of action upon which relief may be granted."

Section 2-615 allows a court to test whether a complaint is legally sufficient to state a cause of action.

Kerbes v. Raceway Associates · filed 2011-11-21

A motion to dismiss pursuant to section 2-615 of the Code attacks the legal sufficiency of the complaint.

Section 2-615 tests whether a complaint states a cause of action when its allegations are viewed in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party.

McFatridge v. Madigan · filed 2011-12-14

A section 2-615 motion to dismiss (735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 2008)) attacks the sufficiency of the complaint and raises the question of whether the allegations of the complaint, when viewed in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party, are sufficient to state a cause of action upon which relief can be granted.

Section 2-615 tests the legal sufficiency of a complaint based on defects apparent on its face.

Doe v. PSI UPSILON INTERN. · filed 2011-12-16

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 permits dismissal when defects on the face of a complaint make it legally insufficient.

Doe v. PSI Upsilon International · filed 2011-12-16

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 tests the legal sufficiency of a complaint.

Estate of Kundert v. Valley Community Hosp. · filed 2012-01-10

A motion brought pursuant to section 2-615 of the Code challenges the legal sufficiency of a complaint.

Section 2-615 motions test a complaint’s legal sufficiency; a dismissal is reviewed de novo, with well-pleaded facts and reasonable inferences accepted as true.

Estate of Kundert v. Illinois Valley Community Hospital · filed 2012-01-12

A motion brought pursuant to section 2-615 of the Code challenges the legal sufficiency of a complaint. ... As such, we review de novo an order granting a section 2-615 motion to dismiss, accepting all well-pleaded facts and reasonable inferences drawn therefrom as true.

Section 2-615 allows a motion to dismiss that challenges the legal sufficiency of the complaint.

Citizens Opposing Pollution v. Exxonmobil Coal U.S.A. · filed 2012-02-02

A motion to dismiss under section 2-615 of the Code (735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 2008)) challenges only the legal sufficiency of the complaint.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal for failure to state a cause of action only when no provable set of facts would entitle the plaintiff to relief; well-pleaded facts and reasonable inferences favor the nonmoving party.

PEOPLE EX REL. DEPT. OF LABOR v. Valdivia · filed 2011-08-16

A cause of action should not be dismissed for failure to state a cause of action "unless it is clearly apparent that no set of facts can be proved that would entitle the plaintiff to relief." Tedrick v. Community Resource Center, Inc., 235 Ill.2d 155, 161, 336 Ill.Dec. 210, 920 N.E.2d 220 (2009) (reviewing dismissal pursuant to section 2-615 of the Code (735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 2010))). We take all well-pleaded facts as true and draw all reasonable inferences in favor of the nonmoving party.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal for failure to state a cause of action only when no provable set of facts would entitle the claimant to relief.

People v. Valdivia · filed 2011-08-16

A cause of action should not be dismissed for failure to state a cause of action “unless it is clearly apparent that no set of facts can be proved that would entitle the plaintiff to relief.” Tedrick v. Community Resource Center, Inc., 235 Ill. 2d 155, 161 (2009) (reviewing dismissal pursuant to section 2-615 of the Code (735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 2010))).

Section 2-615 permits dismissal of a complaint that fails to state a cause of action.

Park v. Northeast Illinois Regional Commuter Railroad Corporation · filed 2011-11-04

A motion to dismiss under section 2-615 of the Code challenges the legal sufficiency of a complaint for failure to state a cause of action on which relief can be granted.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal when a complaint fails to state a claim, even if its allegations are taken as true.

Engineering v. City of Naperville · filed 2011-09-09

A motion to dismiss brought under section 2-615 of the Code attacks the sufficiency of the complaint on the basis that, even assuming the allegations of the complaint to be true, the complaint does not state a cause of action that would entitle the plaintiff to relief.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal for failure to state a cause of action only when it is clearly apparent that no set of facts can be proved that would entitle the plaintiff to relief.

AASONN, LLC v. Delaney · filed 2011-12-02

Unless it is clearly apparent that no set of facts can be proved that would entitle the plaintiff to relief, a cause of action should not be dismissed pursuant to a section 2-615 motion. ... Taken in their entirety, the allegations of the third amended complaint were pleaded with sufficient specificity.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal for legal defects apparent on the face of a complaint, without raising affirmative factual defenses.

Patel v. HOME DEPOT USA, INC. · filed 2012-02-02

A motion to dismiss under section 2-615 attacks the legal sufficiency of the complaint. Such a motion to dismiss does not raise affirmative factual defenses, but alleges defects appearing on the face of the pleadings.

Section 2-615 motions test the legal sufficiency of a complaint, taking well-pleaded facts and reasonable inferences as true.

Patel v. Home Depot USA · filed 2012-02-02

A motion to dismiss under section 2-615 attacks the legal sufficiency of the complaint.

On a section 2-615 motion, the court assesses whether the complaint states a claim, accepting well-pleaded facts and reasonable inferences as true and viewing them in the plaintiff’s favor.

Gartreaux v. DKW Enterprise · filed 2011-09-22

In ruling on a section 2-615 motion to dismiss, a reviewing court must examine the allegations of the complaint in the light most favorable to the plaintiff and accept as true all the well-pleaded facts and reasonable inferences therefrom.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal only when no set of facts can possibly be proved that would entitle the plaintiff to relief.

Stone v. Paddock Publications, Inc. · filed 2011-11-17

Section 2-615 does not permit the dismissal of a claim unless no set of facts can possibly be proved that would entitle the plaintiff to relief.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal only when no set of provable facts would entitle the plaintiff to relief.

Stone v. Paddock Publications · filed 2011-11-17

Section 2-615 does not permit the dismissal of a claim unless no set of facts can possibly be proved that would entitle the plaintiff to relief.

Section 2-615 tests the legal sufficiency of a complaint, taking its allegations and reasonable inferences in the plaintiff’s favor.

Hastings Mut. Ins. Co. v. Ultimate Backyard · filed 2012-02-09

A court considering whether to grant or deny a section 2-615 motion to dismiss must determine whether the allegations of the complaint and all reasonable inferences therefrom, when considered in a light most favorable to the plaintiff, are sufficient to state a cause of action upon which relief can be granted.

A section 2-615 motion challenges the legal sufficiency of the opposing party’s pleadings, and dismissal under the section is reviewed de novo.

In Re County Treasurer · filed 2012-02-17

Section 2-619.1 of the Code (735 ILCS 5/2-619.1 (West 2010)) allows a movant to combine a section 2-615 motion to dismiss, which challenges the legal sufficiency of the nonmovant's pleadings, with a section 2-619 motion to dismiss, which admits the legal sufficiency of the nonmovant's pleadings but asserts certain defects or defenses. Kean v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 235 Ill.2d 351, 361, 336 Ill.Dec. 1, 919 N.E.2d 926 (2009); Edelman, Combs & Latturner v. Hinshaw & Culbertson, 338 Ill.App.3d 156, 164, 273 Ill.Dec. 149, 788 N.E.2d 740 (2003). Under either section 2-615 or 2-619 of the Code, our standard of review is de novo.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal when a complaint’s well-pleaded facts, taken as true, fail to state a cause of action.

Bezanis v. Fox Waterway Agency · filed 2012-03-15

A dismissal under section 2-615 admits all well-pleaded facts and attacks the legal sufficiency of the complaint and presents the question of whether the complaint states a cause of action upon which relief could be granted.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal of a complaint that fails to state a cause of action upon which relief can be granted.

Leja v. Community Unit School District 300 · filed 2012-11-06

A complaint is subject to dismissal under section 2-615 if it fails to state a cause of action upon which relief can be granted.

A section 2-615 motion tests whether a complaint alleges specific facts sufficient to support a claim; conclusory allegations do not suffice.

Simpkins v. CSX Transp., Inc. · filed 2012-03-22

In reviewing dismissal on a section 2-615 motion, we review de novo the sufficiency of the complaint. ... We agree with defendant that the complaint is insufficient in that it alleges a conclusion as a basic element of duty. However, because defendant failed to raise this issue in the circuit court and raised it for the first time before this court, plaintiff did not have a chance to address the problem. Accordingly, the proper remedy is to remand the cause to the circuit court to allow leave to amend the complaint.

Section 2-615 permits a motion to dismiss that challenges the legal sufficiency of a complaint based on defects apparent on its face.

Simpkins v. CSX Transportation · filed 2012-03-22

This appeal is before the court on defendant’s motion to dismiss under section 2-615 (735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 2006)), which challenges the legal sufficiency of a complaint based on defects apparent on its face.

Section 2-615 allows a motion to dismiss that challenges the legal sufficiency of a complaint based on defects apparent on its face.

Wilson v. County of Cook · filed 2012-04-05

A motion to dismiss under section 2-615 challenges the legal sufficiency of the complaint based on defects on the face of the complaint.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal when a complaint’s well-pleaded facts and reasonable inferences, viewed in the plaintiff’s favor, do not establish a cause of action.

BONHOMME v. St. James · filed 2012-05-24

A motion to dismiss brought under section 2-615 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 2008)) attacks the legal sufficiency of a complaint. Vitro v. Mihelcic, 209 Ill.2d 76, 81, 282 Ill.Dec. 335, 806 N.E.2d 632 (2004). In ruling on a section 2-615 motion, a court must accept as true all well-pleaded facts in the complaint, as well as all reasonable inferences therefrom. Id. The critical inquiry is whether the allegations of the complaint, when construed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, are sufficient to establish a cause of action upon which relief may be granted.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal when a complaint fails to state a claim, but dismissal is improper if the plaintiff could prevail under any provable set of facts.

Heinrich v. White · filed 2012-08-27

A motion to dismiss brought under section 2-615 of the Code attacks the sufficiency of the complaint on the basis that, even assuming the allegations of the complaint to be true, the complaint does not state a cause of action that would entitle the plaintiff to relief. ... However, the trial court erred in concluding that Heinrich could not prevail under any set of facts.

Section 2-615 motions test whether a complaint is legally sufficient.

Patrick Engineering, Inc. v. The City of Naperville · filed 2012-09-20

A section 2-615 motion to dismiss tests the legal sufficiency of a complaint.

A section 2-615 motion to dismiss tests the legal sufficiency of the complaint.

Gillick v. Saddler · filed 2012-10-31

A section 2-615 motion to dismiss "tests the legal sufficiency of the complaint," while a section 2-619(a) motion "admits the legal sufficiency of the complaint, but asserts affirmative matter outside the complaint that defeats the cause of action." Kean v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 235 Ill. 2d 351, 361, 919 N.E.2d 926, 931-32 (2009).

Section 2-615 permits a motion challenging the legal sufficiency of a complaint and requires the motion to identify specific defects on the complaint’s face.

Gagnon v. Schickel · filed 2012-12-21

A section 2-615 motion to dismiss attacks the legal sufficiency of the complaint and it must point, with specificity, to the alleged defects on the face of the complaint.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal only when no set of provable facts would entitle the plaintiff to relief.

Board of Education of Peoria School District No. 150 v. Peoria Federation of Support Staff · filed 2012-07-25

A section 2-615 motion to dismiss challenges the legal sufficiency of the complaint. Simpkins v. CSX Transportation, Inc., 2012 IL 110662, ¶ 13. Dismissal under section 2-615 is appropriate only if “it is clearly apparent that no set of facts can be proved that would entitle the plaintiff to recovery.” Id. ... The allegations of plaintiff’s complaint are sufficient to withstand the labor boards’ motion to dismiss. The trial court erred by granting the motion.

Section 2-615 requires a court reviewing a complaint’s sufficiency to accept well-pled facts and reasonable inferences as true and construe the allegations in the plaintiff’s favor.

Independence Plus, Inc. v. Walter · filed 2012-12-14

In reviewing the sufficiency of a complaint under a section 2-615 motion to dismiss, we accept as true all well-pled facts and all reasonable inferences that may be drawn from those facts, and we construe the allegations of the complaint in the light most favorable to the plaintiff.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal when the allegations on the face of a complaint are legally insufficient to state a cause of action.

Brown v. Grosskopf · filed 2013-02-13

A section 2-615 motion (735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 2010)) attacks the legal sufficiency of a complaint. ... Because the only basis of Brown’s lawsuit against Madigan is the nonbinding opinion letter, the lawsuit cannot survive Madigan’s motion to dismiss.

Section 2-615 does not permit dismissal when a complaint sufficiently alleges apparent authority to support relief.

Rasgaitis v. Waterstone Financial Group, Inc. · filed 2013-02-20

No cause of action should be dismissed on the pleadings unless it clearly appears that no set of facts can be proved under the complaint entitling the plaintiffs to relief. ... Accordingly, the plaintiffs have sufficiently pled apparent authority to withstand a section 2-615 dismissal.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal when a pleading fails to state a cause of action upon which relief may be granted.

Montes v. Taylor · filed 2013-03-06

Dismissal of plaintiff’s petition was also appropriate under section 2-615 for failure to state a cause of action upon which relief may be granted.

Section 2-615 requires courts reviewing a motion to dismiss to take well-pleaded facts as true and construe the complaint in the plaintiff’s favor when deciding whether it states a cause of action.

Ringgold Capital IV, LLC v. Finley · filed 2013-06-19

When the legal sufficiency of a complaint is challenged by a motion to dismiss pursuant to section 2-615, all well-pleaded facts in the complaint are taken as true and a reviewing court must determine whether the allegations of the complaint, construed in a light most favorable to the plaintiff, are sufficient to establish a cause of action upon which relief may be granted. Bell v. Hutsell, 2011 IL 110724, ¶ 9.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal for defects apparent on the face of a complaint, but dismissal is improper when the alleged facts could entitle the plaintiff to recovery.

Flores v. Santiago · filed 2013-03-11

“A section 2-615 motion to dismiss [citation] challenges the legal sufficiency of a complaint based on defects apparent on its face.” Marshall, 222 Ill. 2d at 429. ... Based on these allegations, plaintiff may be able to prove a lack of consent based on severe intoxication. Accordingly, we conclude that the circuit court erred in dismissing the amended complaint pursuant to section 2-615 of the Code.

Section 2-615 allows dismissal when a complaint is legally insufficient to state a claim.

Jacobson v. Gimbel · filed 2013-03-27

A section 2-615 motion to dismiss tests the legal sufficiency of the complaint.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal when a complaint fails to state a cause of action upon which relief can be granted.

Mauvis-Jarvis v. Wong · filed 2013-03-28

A section 2-615 motion to dismiss attacks the legal sufficiency of a complaint by asserting that it fails to state a cause of action upon which relief can be granted.

Section 2-615 tests whether a complaint states a cause of action upon which relief can be granted.

Consiglio v. Department of Financial & Professional Regulation · filed 2013-04-08

As the plaintiffs’ complaints in these consolidated appeals were dismissed in response to the defendants’ motions brought pursuant to section 2-615 of the Code, the only question before this court is whether the dismissed counts state causes of action upon which relief can be granted.

Section 2-615 requires a court reviewing dismissal for failure to state a cause of action to view the complaint in the plaintiff’s favor and determine whether its alleged facts could support relief.

Garrick v. Mesirow Financial Holding, Inc. · filed 2013-07-26

In reviewing the propriety of a dismissal for failure to state a cause of action pursuant to section 2-615 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 2004)), we must determine whether the complaint, when viewed in the light most favorable to plaintiffs, alleges sufficient facts to establish a cause of action upon which relief could be granted.

Section 2-615 motions admit well-pleaded facts and test the legal sufficiency of a complaint.

Dixon, Laukitis and Downing, P.C. v. Busey Bank · filed 2013-07-31

A section 2-615 motion admits all well-pleaded facts and attacks the legal sufficiency of the complaint.

A section 2-615 motion tests whether the complaint’s well-pleaded facts and reasonable inferences, viewed in the plaintiff’s favor, establish a cause of action.

Dratewska-Zator v. Rutherford · filed 2013-09-13

When reviewing the legal sufficiency of a claim under section 2-615, the inquiry is whether the allegations of the complaint, when construed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, and taking all well-pleaded facts and all reasonable inferences which may be drawn from those facts as true, are sufficient to establish a cause of action upon which relief may be granted.

Section 2-615 tests the legal sufficiency of a complaint based on defects apparent on its face.

Collins v. Bartlett Park District · filed 2013-09-30

A motion to dismiss under section 2-615 of the Code (735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 2012)) challenges the legal sufficiency of a complaint, based on defects apparent on its face.

A section 2-615 motion tests a complaint’s legal sufficiency based on defects apparent on its face.

Turczak v. First American Bank · filed 2013-10-02

A section 2-615 motion to dismiss attacks "the legal sufficiency of a complaint based on defects apparent on its face."