735 Ill. Comp. Stat. § 5/2-615

Section 2-615 permits dismissal when a complaint fails to allege facts sufficient to state a cause of action, despite the relatively low threshold for surviving a motion to dismiss.

Aliano v. Ferriss · filed 2013-03-29

Although the threshold for withstanding a motion to dismiss pursuant to section 2-615 of the Code is relatively low, the allegations in Aliano’s first amended complaint did not amount to deceptive conduct.

Section 2-615 tests the legal sufficiency of a complaint while treating its well-pleaded facts as true.

Garrido v. Arena · filed 2013-06-18

Yet 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, we must presume that all well-pled facts in the complaint are true.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal only when it is clearly apparent that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts entitling the plaintiff to recover.

McFatridge v. Madigan · filed 2013-06-28

A cause of action should be dismissed under section 2-615 only where it is clearly apparent that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts which would entitle him or her to recover.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal on the pleadings only when no facts provable under the allegations would entitle the pleader to relief.

In re Estate of DiMatteo · filed 2013-10-17

A cause of action should not be dismissed on the pleadings unless it clearly appears that no set of facts could be proven which would entitle the pleader to relief.

A section 2-615 motion tests the legal sufficiency of a complaint; the court accepts well-pleaded facts and reasonable inferences as true.

Peraica v. Riverside-Brookside High School District No. 208 · filed 2013-10-31

When reviewing a section 2-615 motion, we accept as true “[a]ll well-pleaded facts and reasonable inferences that can be drawn from those facts.” Tuite v. Corbitt, 224 Ill. 2d 490, 509 (2006).

Section 2-615 allows a motion challenging defects apparent on the face of a complaint.

Collins v. Bartlett Park District · filed 2013-11-18

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.

Section 2-615 allows a motion to dismiss a complaint for defects in its legal sufficiency apparent on its face.

Turczak v. First American Bank · filed 2013-11-21

A section 2-615 motion to dismiss attacks “the legal sufficiency of a complaint based on defects apparent on its face.” Pooh-Bah Enterprises, Inc. v. County of Cook, 232 Ill. 2d 463, 473 (2009); see 735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 2008).

On a section 2-615 motion challenging a complaint’s legal sufficiency, the court accepts the complaint’s allegations as true.

Nelson v. Quarles and Brady, LLP · filed 2013-11-21

For purposes of our review of the ruling on defendant’s motion to dismiss, where the legal sufficiency of the complaint has been attacked, we accept as true the allegations in plaintiff’s third amended complaint.

Section 2-615 requires the court to accept well-pleaded facts as true and permits dismissal when no facts provable under the pleadings would entitle the plaintiff to relief.

Avon Hardware Co. v. Ace Hardware Corp. · filed 2013-10-28

A section 2-615 motion admits all well-pleaded facts as true, and dismissal is proper when it clearly appears that no set of facts could be proved under the pleadings which would entitle the plaintiff to relief.

Section 2-615 tests whether a complaint states a claim based on its well-pleaded facts; unsupported conclusions are disregarded.

Illinois Insurance Guaranty Fund v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. · filed 2014-01-21

We note that the question presented by a section 2-615 motion to dismiss 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. ... When ruling on a section 2-615 motion to dismiss, the circuit court must admit all well-pleaded facts as true and disregard any legal and factual conclusions that are unsupported by allegations of fact.

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

Gibbs v. Blitt and Gaines, P.C. · filed 2014-02-11

A section 2-615 motion to dismiss challenges the sufficiency of the pleadings and the court determines whether the allegations of the complaint, construed in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party and taking all well-pleaded facts as true, are sufficient to state a cause of action upon which relief may be granted.

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

Gibbs v. Blitt and Gaines, P.C. · filed 2014-04-17

A section 2-615 motion to dismiss challenges the sufficiency of the pleadings and the court determines whether the allegations of the complaint, construed in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party and taking all well-pleaded facts as true, are sufficient to state a cause of action upon which relief may be granted.

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

Powell v. American Service Insurance Company · filed 2014-05-01

The question presented by a section 2-615 motion to dismiss is whether sufficient facts have been pled in the complaint which, if proved, would entitle the plaintiff to relief.

Section 2-615 requires a court to view the complaint’s allegations in the plaintiff’s favor and decide whether they state a claim for relief.

Donald W. Fohrman & Associates, Ltd. v. Marc D. Alberts, P.C. · filed 2014-05-02

In ruling upon a section 2-615 motion to dismiss, a court must decide whether the allegations of the complaint, when viewed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, are sufficient to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.

Section 2-615 permits a motion to dismiss a complaint for legal defects apparent on its face.

Amco Insurance Company v. Cincinnati Insurance Company · filed 2014-05-05

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

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

Brooks v. McLean County District Unit No. 5 · filed 2014-05-16

A section 2-615 motion to dismiss "tests the legal sufficiency of the complaint," while a section 2-619 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 dismissal only when the pleadings clearly show that no provable facts would entitle the plaintiff to relief.

In re the Estate of Powell · filed 2014-06-19

A complaint should be dismissed under section 2-615 only if it is clearly apparent from the pleadings that no set of facts can be proven that would entitle the plaintiff to recover.

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

Amco Insurance Company v. Cincinnati Insurance Company · filed 2014-06-23

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

On a section 2-615 motion, the court accepts well-pleaded facts and favorable reasonable inferences and determines whether the complaint states a cause of action.

Cowper v. Nyberg · filed 2014-06-24

When the trial court is presented with a motion to dismiss a case 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 2010)), the court must determine whether the complaint sets forth sufficient facts that, if established, could entitle the plaintiff to relief. ... At the pleading stage we view the facts and their inferences in a light most favorable to Cowper and find that he has adequately pled duty, breach, proximate cause, and damages sufficient to state a cause of action implied by the statute.

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

Steenes v. Mac Property Management, LLC · filed 2014-07-23

A motion to dismiss pursuant to section 2-615 of the Code attacks the legal and factual sufficiency of the complaint. ... Therefore, the circuit court properly dismissed, with prejudice, counts I, II, and III of the amended complaint for failure to state causes of action.

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

Lewis v. Heartland Food Corporation · filed 2014-08-19

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

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

Kanerva v. Weems · filed 2014-08-26

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

Section 2-615 permits dismissal when the pleaded facts fail to establish a legal duty, because the existence of a duty is a question of law.

Tyrka v. Glenview Ridge Condominium Association · filed 2014-06-27

Whether a duty exists in a particular case is a question of law for the court to decide and so it is therefore an appropriate ground for a section 2-615 motion to dismiss.

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

Kanerva v. Weems · filed 2014-07-03

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

Section 2-615 permits dismissal when it is clear that no facts could be alleged that would entitle the claimant to relief.

Financial Freedom Acquisition, LLC v. Standard Bank and Trust Co. · filed 2014-08-11

A cause of action should not be dismissed pursuant to section 2-615 unless it is clearly apparent that no set of facts can be alleged which would entitle the plaintiff to recovery. Tedrick, 235 Ill. 2d at 161. In this case, Standard Bank cannot allege a cause of action for rescission as it is not an obligor on the loan. For these reasons, we affirm the decision of the circuit court dismissing the counterclaim with prejudice.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal only when the complaint’s allegations, viewed in the plaintiff’s favor, cannot establish a claim for relief.

In re Estate of Powell · filed 2014-07-28

A complaint should be dismissed under section 2-615 only if it is clearly apparent from the pleadings that no set of facts can be proven that would entitle the plaintiff to recover.

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

Regions Bank v. Joyce Meyer Ministries, Inc. · filed 2014-08-12

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 recover.

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

Akemann v. Quinn · filed 2014-08-26

In reviewing the legal sufficiency of a claim under section 2-615, we determine whether the allegations of the complaint, construed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff and taking all well-pleaded facts and reasonable inferences as true, are sufficient to establish a cause of action upon which relief may be granted. ... Plaintiff has no right to serve as an arbitrator for the three-year renewal term and his claim was properly dismissed under section 2-615.

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

Regions Bank v. Joyce Meyer Ministries, Inc. · filed 2014-09-15

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 recover.

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

Lewis v. Heartland Food Corp. · filed 2014-10-15

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

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

Lutkauskas v. Ricker · filed 2015-01-23

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

A section 2-615 motion tests whether a complaint states a cause of action; conclusory allegations unsupported by specific facts are insufficient.

Steenes v. MAC Property Management, LLC · filed 2014-09-26

“Mere conclusions of law or facts unsupported by specific factual allegations in a complaint are insufficient to withstand a section 2-615 motion to dismiss.” ... Plaintiff’s arguments and the general conclusory allegations of the amended complaint are insufficient to state her claim under the RLTO that the move-in fee was a security deposit.

Section 2-615 requires specific factual allegations; conclusory allegations cannot survive a motion to dismiss.

Dennis v. Pace Suburban Bus Service · filed 2014-10-02

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

Section 2-615 tests whether a complaint pleads sufficient facts that, if proven, could entitle the plaintiff to relief.

Grundhoefer v. Sorin · filed 2014-10-27

Thus, the question presented by a section 2-615 motion to dismiss is whether the pleadings contain sufficient facts which, if proven, could entitle plaintiff to relief.

A complaint must allege specific facts rather than conclusory allegations to survive a section 2-615 motion to dismiss.

Dennis v. Pace Suburban Bus Service · filed 2014-11-17

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

Section 2-615 tests a complaint’s legal sufficiency; the court accepts well-pleaded facts as true and dismisses only when no provable facts would entitle the plaintiff to recover.

State of Illinois ex rel. Pusateri v. Peoples Gas Light & Coke Co. · filed 2014-12-29

A court deciding a section 2-615 motion must accept all well-pleaded facts in the complaint as true, and it should dismiss the complaint only where it is apparent no set of facts could be proven that would entitle the plaintiff to recover.

Section 2-615 requires a court reviewing a motion to dismiss for insufficient allegations to accept well-pleaded facts as true and draw reasonable inferences in the claimant’s favor.

Blumenthal v. Brewer · filed 2015-02-09

A motion to dismiss for factual insufficiency is governed by section 2-615 of the Code of Civil Procedure. ... The court must accept all well-pled facts in the complaint as true and draw reasonable inferences from those facts that are favorable to the complainant.

Section 2-615 allows a motion to dismiss that tests the legal sufficiency of a claim, including whether the plaintiff pleaded standing.

In re Parentage of Scarlett Z.-D. · filed 2015-03-19

A motion to dismiss under section 2-615 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 2012)) tests the legal sufficiency of the plaintiff’s claim, while a motion to dismiss under section 2-619 (735 ILCS 5/2-619 (West 2012)) admits the legal sufficiency of the plaintiff’s claim, but asserts certain defects or defenses outside the pleading that defeat the claim.

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

Kapotas v. Better Government Association · filed 2015-03-31

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 asks whether the complaint’s allegations, viewed in the plaintiff’s favor, state a claim for relief.

Mack Industries, Ltd. v. The Village of Dolton · filed 2015-04-27

When ruling on a section 2-615 motion, the relevant question is whether the allegations in the complaint, 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 claim for a discretionary compensation award to survive dismissal when the complaint identifies the factors used to determine the award, even if it does not state the amount owed.

McCleary v. Wells Fargo Securities, LLC · filed 2015-03-23

Where an employer has discretion in determining a compensation award based on a compensation agreement which identifies factors to be considered in formulating that award, an allegation identifying those factors is specific enough to be actionable to survive a section 2-615 motion to dismiss.

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

Mack Industries, Ltd. v. The Village of Dolton · filed 2015-03-31

A motion to dismiss pursuant to section 2-615 of the Code (735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 2010)) attacks the legal sufficiency of a complaint by alleging defects on the face of the complaint.

A section 2-615 motion does not require plaintiffs to prove their case; allegations sufficient to show that liability might attach can survive dismissal.

Borcia v. Hatyina · filed 2015-04-14

However, a section 2-615 motion does not require plaintiffs to prove their case at this juncture, and plaintiffs’ allegations are sufficient to show that liability might attach.

Section 2-615 motions test the legal sufficiency of a plaintiff’s claim.

In re Parentage of Scarlett Z.-D. · filed 2015-04-23

A motion to dismiss under section 2-615 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 2012)) tests the legal sufficiency of the plaintiff’s claim, while a motion to dismiss under ... section 2-619 (735 ILCS 5/2-619 (West 2012)) admits the legal sufficiency of the plaintiff’s claim, but asserts certain defects or defenses outside the pleading that defeat the claim.

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

Mack Industries, Ltd. v. Village of Dolton · filed 2015-05-26

When ruling on a section 2-615 motion, the relevant question is whether the allegations in the complaint, 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 does not require plaintiffs to prove their case at the dismissal stage when their allegations show that liability might attach.

Borcia v. Hatyina · filed 2015-06-01

However, a section 2-615 motion does not require plaintiffs to prove their case at this juncture, and plaintiffs’ allegations are sufficient to show that liability might attach.

Section 2-615 tests whether a complaint’s allegations, taken as true and viewed in the plaintiff’s favor, state a claim for relief.

In re Estate of Brewer · filed 2015-06-17

On review of a dismissal under section 2-615, the question presented is whether the allegations of the complaint, when 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.

Section 2-615 requires courts to accept well-pleaded facts as true; disputed allegations and defense evidence do not justify dismissal at the pleading stage.

Carter v. The City of Alton · filed 2015-05-04

The plaintiffs next argue that their complaints should not have been dismissed pursuant to section 2-615 because they adequately state claims for relief. We agree. ... However, the plaintiffs were not required to prove their case to survive a motion to dismiss. The fact that the defendants dispute the plaintiffs' allegations and have some evidence to support their contentions does not mean that dismissal at the pleading stage is warranted.

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

Turcios v. The DeBruler Company · filed 2015-05-21

A cause of action will be dismissed under section 2-615 only where it is apparent that no set of facts could be proven that would entitle the plaintiff to relief.

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

Kapotas v. Better Government Ass'n · filed 2015-05-26

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 only when it is clear that no set of facts could entitle the plaintiff to relief.

Hadley v. Subscriber Doe · filed 2015-06-18

A circuit court should not dismiss a complaint under section 2-615 unless it is clearly apparent no set of facts can be proved that would entitle the plaintiff to recovery.

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

Turcios v. The DeBruler Company · filed 2015-06-26

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

Section 2-615 permits dismissal when a complaint fails to state a cause of action, even assuming its allegations are true.

Abazari v. Rosalind Franklin University of Medicine and Science · filed 2015-06-29

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

Freedman v. Muller · filed 2015-06-30

Turning to the merits, this appeal is from the grant of a motion to dismiss pursuant to section 2-615 of the Code (735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 2012)), which challenges the legal sufficiency of a complaint based on defects apparent on its face.

Section 2-615 does not permit dismissal when a complaint adequately states a claim for relief.

Carter v. The City of Alton · filed 2015-06-17

The plaintiffs next argue that their complaints should not have been dismissed pursuant to section 2-615 because they adequately state claims for relief. We agree.

A section 2-615 motion tests the legal sufficiency of a claim, including whether the pleaded facts can support relief.

In re Estate of Brewer · filed 2015-08-10

A motion to dismiss under section 2-615 tests the legal sufficiency of the plaintiff’s claim, while a motion to dismiss under section 2-619 admits the legal sufficiency of the plaintiff’s claim but asserts certain defects or defenses outside the pleading that defeat the claim.

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

Freedman v. Muller · filed 2015-07-17

Turning to the merits, this appeal is from the grant of a motion to dismiss pursuant to section 2-615 of the Code (735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 2012)), which challenges the legal sufficiency of a complaint based on defects apparent on its face. ... Although a complaint does not need to contain evidence, it cannot be merely conclusory, and must allege facts sufficient to bring a claim within a legally recognized cause of action. ... Because an agreement or promise or an equitable claim is necessary for Freedman to enforce a property right against Muller, and her palimony claim does not include those elements, her palimony claim failed to allege facts sufficient to bring her claim within a legally recognized cause of action, and was properly dismissed. See Redelmann, 375 Ill. App. 3d at 921.

A section 2-615 motion tests whether a complaint states sufficient facts for a cause of action; dismissal is improper unless no provable facts would entitle the plaintiff to recovery.

Hadley v. Subscriber Doe · filed 2015-07-23

A section 2-615 motion to dismiss tests the legal sufficiency of a complaint. ... A circuit court should not dismiss a complaint under section 2-615 unless it is clearly apparent no set of facts can be proved that would entitle the plaintiff to recovery. ... We conclude that Hadley’s complaint states facts to establish a cause of action for defamation sufficient to withstand a section 2-615 motion to dismiss.

Section 2-615 allows dismissal when defects apparent on the face of a complaint show that it is legally insufficient.

Freedman v. Muller · filed 2015-08-19

Turning to the merits, this appeal is from the grant of a motion to dismiss pursuant to section 2-615 of the Code (735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 2012)), which challenges the legal sufficiency of a complaint based on defects apparent on its face.

Section 2-615 tests whether a complaint, construed in the plaintiff’s favor, alleges enough facts to state a claim.

Schweihs v. Chase Home Finance, LLC · filed 2015-09-30

The central issue presented by 2-615 motion is “whether the allegations of the complaint, when construed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, state sufficient facts to establish a cause of action upon which relief may be granted.”

Section 2-615 allows a motion to dismiss a complaint for legal defects apparent on its face.

Board of Managers of Park Point at Wheeling Condominium Association v. Park Point at Wheeling, LLC · filed 2015-10-15

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

Section 2-615 requires the court to read a complaint’s allegations in the plaintiff’s favor and determine whether they state a claim for relief.

Sorrells v. City of Macomb · filed 2015-10-23

The critical inquiry in determining whether a pleading should be dismissed pursuant to section 2-615 is whether the allegations, 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 no set of facts could be proved that would entitle the plaintiff to relief.

McIlvaine v. The City of St. Charles · filed 2015-09-23

A section 2-615 motion to dismiss should be granted only when it is apparent that no set of facts can be proved that would entitle the plaintiff to relief.

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

Board of Managers of Park Point at Wheeling Condominium Association v. Park Point at Wheeling, LLC · filed 2015-09-30

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

Section 2-615 permits dismissal of a complaint that fails to state a valid claim under Illinois law.

Gilyana v. Assyrian American Ass'n of Chicago · filed 2015-09-25

Accordingly, the trial court properly dismissed the case pursuant to section 2-615 of the Code for failure to state a valid claim under Illinois law.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal for failure to state a claim only when no provable set of well-pleaded facts would entitle the plaintiff to recover.

Karonis v. Visible Spectrum, Inc. · filed 2015-10-16

A court deciding a section 2-615 motion must accept all well-pleaded facts in the complaint as true, and it should dismiss the complaint only where no set of facts could be proven that would entitle the plaintiff to recover.

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

Accel Entertainment Gaming, LLC v. Village of Elmwood Park · filed 2015-12-11

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(a) tests whether a complaint’s well-pleaded facts and reasonable inferences, taken as true, state a claim for relief.

Hachem v. Chicago Title Insurance Company · filed 2015-12-14(a)

A section 2-615(a) motion presents the question of whether the facts alleged in the complaint, viewed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, and taking all well-pleaded facts and all reasonable inferences that may be drawn from those facts as true, are sufficient to state a cause of action upon which relief may be granted.

Section 2-615 allows a motion to dismiss a pleading whose stated facts are insufficient to support a cause of action.

Lakeview Loan Servicing, LLC v. Pendleton · filed 2015-12-24

A section 2-615 motion to dismiss attacks the legal sufficiency of a pleading by alleging that the facts stated in the pleading are insufficient to state a cause of action on which relief may be granted.

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

Board of Managers of Park Point at Wheeling Condominium Association. v. Park Point at Wheeling, LLC · filed 2015-12-31

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

Section 2-615 permits dismissal when the facts pleaded are legally insufficient to state a claim for relief.

Lakeview Loan Servicing, LLC v. Pendleton · filed 2016-01-07

A section 2-615 motion to dismiss attacks the legal sufficiency of a pleading by alleging that the facts stated in the pleading are insufficient to state a cause of action on which relief may be granted.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal when defects apparent on the face of a pleading show that it does not state a legally sufficient claim.

Hachem v. Chicago Title Insurance Company · filed 2016-01-08(a)

A section 2-615 motion to dismiss attacks the legal sufficiency of claims based on defects apparent on the face of the pleading. ... Because plaintiffs could not recover from the Wolfe defendants regarding the failure to disclose the landmark designation and it was not the Wolfe defendants' obligation to affix a plaque, the circuit court was correct in dismissing the action against the Wolfe defendants with prejudice.

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

Board of Managers of Park Point at Wheeling Condominium Association. v. Park Point at Wheeling, LLC · filed 2016-01-14

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

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

Boffa Surgical Group LLC v. Managed Healthcare Associates Ltd. · filed 2015-12-23

We affirm the judgment of the circuit court dismissing plaintiffs’ amended complaint under section 2-615 of the Code for failure to plead a cause of action.

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

Boffa Surgical Group LLC v. Managed Healthcare Associates Ltd. · filed 2016-02-23

Because this matter was disposed of at the trial level upon defendants’ motion to dismiss pursuant to section 2-615 of the Code, the issue before this court is whether the dismissed complaint stated a cause of action upon which relief can be granted.

Section 2-615 requires a plaintiff to plead ultimate facts, not evidentiary facts, to state a claim.

Fiala v. Bickford Senior Living Group, LLC · filed 2016-01-12

Plaintiff is required to allege facts, but need allege only the ultimate facts that must be proved, not evidentiary facts. Chandler v. Illinois Central R.R. Co., 207 Ill. 2d 331, 348 (2003). We determine that plaintiff has sufficiently pleaded factual allegations to support his claim. Accordingly, we reject defendant’s argument that plaintiff’s allegations are conclusory.

Section 2-615(a) allows dismissal when a pleading’s apparent defects make it legally insufficient to state a claim.

Hachem v. Chicago Title Insurance Company · filed 2016-02-19(a)

A section 2-615 motion to dismiss attacks the legal sufficiency of claims based on defects apparent on the face of the pleading.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal when the facts pleaded are insufficient to state a cause of action on which relief may be granted.

Lakeview Loan Servicing, LLC v. Pendleton · filed 2016-02-23

A section 2-615 motion to dismiss attacks the legal sufficiency of a pleading by alleging that the facts stated in the pleading are insufficient to state a cause of action on which relief may be granted.

Section 2-615(a) permits dismissal when a complaint is legally insufficient to state a claim.

Rubin and Norris, LLC v. Panzarella · filed 2016-03-11(a)

A motion to dismiss under section 2-615(a) of the Code (735 ILCS 5/2-615(a) (West 2012)) tests the legal sufficiency of a plaintiff’s claim; a motion to dismiss under section 2-619(a) (735 ILCS 5/2-619(a) (West 2012)) admits the legal sufficiency of the plaintiff’s claim, but asserts certain defects or defenses outside the pleading that defeat the claim.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal when a complaint, even if its allegations are true, does not state a cause of action entitling the plaintiff to relief.

CitiMortgage, Inc v. Parille · filed 2016-01-22

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 requires courts to assess whether the complaint’s allegations, viewed in the plaintiff’s favor, state a cause of action.

Sorrells v. City of Macomb · filed 2016-01-29

The critical inquiry in determining whether a pleading should be dismissed pursuant to section 2-615 is whether the allegations, 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 tests whether a complaint, construed in the plaintiff’s favor, alleges sufficient facts to state a cause of action.

Moon v. Liu · filed 2016-01-29

A section 2-615 motion to dismiss tests the legal sufficiency of a complaint, i.e., whether the allegations of the complaint, when construed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, state sufficient facts to establish a cause of action upon which relief may be granted.

Section 2-615 tests the legal sufficiency of a complaint, including whether its allegations establish an enforceable contract.

DiCosola v. Ryan · filed 2016-01-29

Although the circuit court found in support of its dismissal under section 2-619 of the Code both that no enforceable contract was formed by the “Letter of Intent” and that no consideration existed, these findings go to the legal sufficiency of the allegations in the plaintiff’s complaint; a section 2-615 inquiry.

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

Cebertowicz v. Madigan · filed 2016-02-25

A section 2-615 motion to dismiss (735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 2012)) 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 a complaint’s legal sufficiency based on defects apparent on its face.

Adams v. Employers Insurance Company of Wausau · filed 2016-03-23(a)

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

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

Kagan v. Waldheim Cemetery Company · filed 2016-04-08

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

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

Kim v. Song · filed 2016-04-25

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

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

Henby v. White · filed 2016-08-01

The question 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 establish a cause of action upon which relief may be granted.

Section 2-615 tests whether the allegations on the face of a complaint, read in the plaintiff's favor, state a claim for relief.

Thompson v. N.J. · filed 2016-04-29

When ruling on a section 2-615 motion, the relevant question is whether the allegations in the complaint, 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 permits a motion challenging the legal sufficiency of a complaint, including whether it alleges a duty owed to the plaintiff.

Phelps v. Land of Lincoln Legal Assistance Foundation, Inc. · filed 2016-06-21

Because this argument is asserting the legal insufficiency of the complaint, it is properly brought pursuant to section 2-615 of the Code (735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 2014)).

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

Better Government Assocation v. Illinois High School District 230 · filed 2016-06-24

A section 2-615 motion to dismiss, like that filed by District 230, tests the legal sufficiency of a complaint.

Section 2-615 tests a complaint’s legal sufficiency based on defects apparent on its face; a complaint that omits a necessary allegation is defective.

Veazey v. Rich Township High School District 227 · filed 2016-07-20

A section 2-615 motion to dismiss tests the legal sufficiency of the complaint based on defects apparent on the face of the pleading. ... Because such allegations are absent, Veazey’s complaint is “fatally defective.”

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

Lorenc v. Forest Preserve District · filed 2016-07-22

In ruling on a section 2-615 motion, the court must determine whether the allegations in 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. ... Thus, the court did not err in granting the defendant’s section 2-615 motion to dismiss.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal when defects apparent on the face of a complaint show that it fails to state a legally sufficient claim.

Cochran v. Securitas Security Services USA, Inc. · filed 2016-08-03

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

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

Kim v. Song · filed 2016-08-08

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

A section 2-615 motion tests a complaint’s legal sufficiency; courts accept well-pleaded facts and reasonable inferences as true but disregard unsupported conclusions.

Better Government Ass'n v. Illinois High School Ass'n · filed 2016-08-29

A section 2-615 motion to dismiss, like that filed by District 230, tests the legal sufficiency of a complaint. 735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 2014). “When ruling on such motions, a court must accept as true all well-pleaded facts, as well as any reasonable inferences that may arise from them [citation], but a court cannot accept as true mere conclusions unsupported by specific facts [citation].”

Section 2-615 permits dismissal when the complaint’s allegations, viewed in the plaintiff’s favor, do not establish a cause of action.

Lorenc v. Forest Preserve District · filed 2016-09-30

In ruling on a section 2-615 motion, the court must determine whether the allegations in 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. ... Thus, the court did not err in granting the defendant’s section 2-615 motion to dismiss.

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

Matthews v. Chicago Transit Authority · filed 2016-05-05

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

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

Matthews v. Chicago Transit Authority · filed 2016-06-24

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

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

Gwinn v. Gwinn · filed 2016-08-15

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

On a section 2-615 motion, the court must accept well-pleaded facts and reasonable inferences as true.

Blumenthal v. Brewer · filed 2016-08-18

In ruling on a section 2-615 motion, a court must accept as true all well-pleaded facts and all reasonable inferences that may be drawn from those facts.

Section 2-615 tests whether a complaint is legally sufficient.

Horn v. Goodman · filed 2016-10-14

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

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

Kagan v. Waldheim Cemetery Company · filed 2016-10-21

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

Section 2-615 permits dismissal when a complaint is legally insufficient on its face, including when it fails to plead facts establishing a necessary element of a claim.

Salvi v. The Village of Lake Zurich · filed 2016-10-31

A motion to dismiss under section 2-615 of the Code challenges the legal sufficiency of a complaint, based on defects apparent on its face. Marshall v. Burger King Corp., 222 Ill. 2d 422, 429 (2006). ... Consequently, since the Agreement contains nothing that is “ ‘practically an express declaration’ ” (Barba, 2015 IL App (2d) 140337, ¶ 22 (quoting F.H. Paschen/S.N. Nielsen, Inc., 372 Ill. App. 3d at 96)) of an intent to confer a benefit on plaintiff, we hold that she has failed to plead her status as a third-party beneficiary.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal when the complaint, viewed in the plaintiff’s favor, fails to state a claim for relief.

In re Application of the County Collector · filed 2016-11-01

The crucial inquiry in ruling upon a section 2-615 motion to dismiss is whether the allegations of the complaint, considered 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 motions test whether defects apparent on the face of a complaint make it legally insufficient.

Dempsey v. Johnson · filed 2016-11-10

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

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

Schweihs v. Chase Home Finance, LLC · filed 2016-12-15

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

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

Gassman v. The Clerk of the Circuit Court of Cook County · filed 2017-01-17

A section 2-615 motion to dismiss attacks the legal sufficiency of the complaint and presents the question of whether the complaint states a cause of action upon which relief can be granted.

A section 2-615 motion tests whether the complaint’s allegations, construed in the plaintiff’s favor, state a cause of action.

Pilotto v. Urban Outfitters West, L.L.C. · filed 2017-02-03

When ruling on a section 2-615 motion, the relevant question is whether the allegations in the complaint, construed in a light most favorable to the plaintiff, are sufficient to state a cause of action upon which relief may be granted.

A section 2-615 motion challenges the sufficiency of a complaint on its face.

Babbitt Municipalities, Inc. v. Health Care Service Corp. · filed 2016-10-11

A motion to dismiss brought pursuant to section 2-615 of the Code is a facial challenge to the sufficiency of the complaint.

Section 2-615 permits a facial challenge to the sufficiency of a complaint.

Babbitt Municipalities, Inc. v. Health Care Service Corp. · filed 2016-12-09

A motion to dismiss brought pursuant to section 2-615 of the Code is a facial challenge to the sufficiency of the complaint.

Section 2-615 requires courts to accept well-pleaded facts and reasonable inferences as true when assessing a pleading's legal sufficiency.

Blumenthal v. Brewer · filed 2017-01-25

In ruling on a section 2-615 motion, a court must accept as true all well-pleaded facts and all reasonable inferences that may be drawn from those facts.

Section 2-615 permits a motion challenging a complaint’s legal sufficiency based on defects apparent on its face.

Dempsey v. Johnson · filed 2017-02-22

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

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

Gwinn v. Gwinn · filed 2016-10-14

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

Section 2-615 permits dismissal when a complaint lacks facts sufficient to state a claim, including facts supporting an injunction against a prospective public nuisance.

Village of Willow Springs v. Village of Lemont · filed 2016-12-19

Accordingly, Willow Springs’s claim (or claims) based on a future public nuisance was properly dismissed pursuant to section 2-615 of the Code.

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

Falls v. Silver Cross Hospital and Medical Centers · filed 2017-01-10

A section 2-615 motion to dismiss “should not be granted unless it clearly appears that no set of facts could ever be proved that would entitle the plaintiffs to recover.” Behrens v. Harrah’s Illinois Corp., 366 Ill. App. 3d 1154, 1156 (2006) (citing Ostendorf v. International Harvester Co., 89 Ill. 2d 273 (1982)).

On a section 2-615 motion, the court accepts well-pled facts as true but does not accept conclusions unsupported by factual allegations.

Doe v. Doe · filed 2017-01-24

Although in ruling on a section 2-615 motion to dismiss the court must accept as true all well-pled facts contained in the complaint under attack, the court does not accept as true conclusions of fact or law that are not supported by allegations of fact upon which the conclusions rest.

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

Falls v. Silver Cross Hospital and Medical Centers · filed 2017-02-15

A section 2-615 motion to dismiss “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 permits dismissal when it is clear from the complaint that no provable facts would entitle the plaintiff to recover.

In re Estate of Cargola · filed 2017-02-17

Dismissing a cause of action pursuant to section 2-615 is proper when it is clearly apparent that no set of facts can be proved that would entitle a plaintiff to recover.

Section 2-615 tests whether a complaint states a cause of action, with its allegations read in the nonmoving party’s favor.

In re Parentage of A.H. · filed 2017-03-06

A section 2-615 motion questions whether a complaint states a cause of action. Id. at 488. ... Although Harlow and Wipaporn were not legally married, Harlow cannot claim, in the context of a motion to dismiss, which admits all well-pled allegations in the complaint and reasonable inferences therefrom, that he was merely a sperm donor.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal of a complaint for legal defects apparent on its face.

Sweeney v. The City of Decatur · filed 2017-03-24

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

Section 2-615 requires a court reviewing a complaint’s legal sufficiency to accept well-pleaded facts and reasonable inferences as true and view them in the plaintiff’s favor.

Walker v. Monreal · filed 2017-04-03

Under section 2-615 of the Code, we accept as true all well-pleaded facts contained within the complaint, along with the reasonable inferences, and view those facts in the light most favorable to the plaintiff.

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

In re Parentage of J.W. · filed 2017-04-28

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

A section 2-615 motion tests whether a complaint states a cause of action; the court accepts well-pleaded facts and reasonable inferences as true and views the allegations in the plaintiff’s favor.

Shushunov v. Illinois Department of Financial & Professional Regulation · filed 2017-05-01

Because plaintiff’s second amended complaint was dismissed in response to defendants’ section 2-615 motion, we must determine whether the dismissed claims state causes of action upon which relief may be granted. ... In considering the legal sufficiency of the complaint alleging that the statute is unconstitutional, we must take as true all well-pleaded facts, as well as draw all reasonable inferences from those facts, while viewing the allegations in a light most favorable to plaintiff.

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

Alford v. Shelton (In Re Estate of Shelton) · filed 2017-05-18

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

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

Ferris, Thompson & Zweig, Ltd. v. Esposito · filed 2017-05-18

Motions to dismiss under section 2-615 challenge the legal sufficiency of a complaint based on defects apparent on its face.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal when the complaint shows that no set of facts can be proved that would entitle the plaintiff to recover.

In re Estate of Cargola · filed 2017-05-26

Dismissing a cause of action pursuant to section 2-615 is proper when it is clearly apparent that no set of facts can be proved that would entitle a plaintiff to recover.

Section 2-615 allows dismissal for failure to state a claim only when no set of facts could be proved that would entitle the plaintiff to relief.

Jones v. Brown-Marino · filed 2017-04-11

A section 2-615 motion to dismiss should not be granted unless no set of facts could be proved that would entitle the plaintiff to relief.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal only when the complaint’s well-pleaded allegations, viewed favorably to the plaintiff, cannot establish a right to relief.

Fillmore v. Taylor · filed 2017-07-12

“Dismissal pursuant to section 2-615 *** is only proper where, when construing the allegations of the complaint in the light most favorable to plaintiff, it clearly appears that no set of facts can be proved under the pleadings which will entitle the plaintiff to recover.”

On a section 2-615 motion, the court accepts well-pleaded facts and reasonable inferences in the nonmoving party’s favor; dismissal is proper if no alleged facts would entitle the plaintiff to relief.

Krozel v. Illinois Court of Claims · filed 2017-07-14

In reviewing a dismissal pursuant to both sections 2-615 and 2-619 of the Code (735 ILCS 5/2-615, 2-619 (West 2014)), “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.” Dopkeen v. Whitaker, 399 Ill. App. 3d 682, 684 (2010). Dismissal under either section is proper where plaintiff alleges no set of facts that would entitle her to relief. Id. We review dismissal pursuant to both sections de novo. Kopchar v. City of Chicago, 395 Ill. App. 3d 762, 766 (2009).

Section 2-615 allows dismissal for failure to state a claim only when no set of facts alleged, taken as true, would warrant relief under a recognized cause of action.

Village of West Dundee v. First United Methodist Church · filed 2017-05-12

All that is required to survive a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim is that the plaintiff allege facts that, taken as true, are sufficient to bring a claim within a recognized cause of action. Kanerva v. Weems, 2014 IL 115811, ¶ 33. In other words, a complaint should not be dismissed on section 2-615 grounds unless no set of facts would warrant relief. Borcia v. Hatyina, 2015 IL App (2d) 140559, ¶ 20. Such is not the case with any of the claims in the Church’s amended countercomplaint.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal of a legally insufficient complaint; courts accept well-pleaded facts and reasonable inferences as true and view them in the plaintiff’s favor.

Walker v. Monreal · filed 2017-06-22

Section 2-615 of the Code governs motions to dismiss complaints that are substantially insufficient in law. See 735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 2012). Under section 2-615 of the Code, we accept as true all well-pleaded facts contained within the complaint, along with the reasonable inferences, and view those facts in the light most favorable to the plaintiff. ... The mandamus complaint failed to state a claim.

A section 2-615 motion tests whether a complaint states a cause of action; the court accepts well-pleaded facts as true and disregards unsupported conclusory allegations.

Fillmore v. Taylor · filed 2017-08-22

Because the motion for dismissal was pursuant to section 2-615 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 2016)), the question is whether the complaint states a cause of action for mandamus, declaratory relief, or a common-law writ of certiorari: the three forms of relief that plaintiff sought in the three counts of his complaint. ... We answer that question de novo, taking the well-pleaded facts or specific factual allegations of the complaint to be true and disregarding any conclusory allegations unsupported by well-pleaded facts.

Section 2-615 does not permit dismissal when the complaint alleges facts that, taken as true, would entitle the plaintiff to relief.

Rodriguez v. Brady · filed 2017-06-06

Accordingly, the circuit court’s granting of defendant’s section 2-615 motion to dismiss was improper, as plaintiff sufficiently pled a set of facts that would legally entitle him to relief.

A section 2-615 motion tests whether a complaint states a claim, and dismissal is improper if any provable set of facts would entitle the plaintiff to relief.

Jones v. Brown-Marino · filed 2017-06-30

A section 2-615 motion to dismiss should not be granted unless no set of facts could be proved that would entitle the plaintiff to relief.

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

Schweihs v. Chase Home Finance, LLC · filed 2017-07-07

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

A section 2-615 challenge tests the legal sufficiency of the complaint; affidavits offered for a section 2-619 challenge do not establish a separate basis for dismissal under section 2-615.

Doe v. Coe · filed 2017-08-17

In fact, in their arguments on appeal, defendants do not treat their section 2-615 and 2-619 challenges as independent but weave the affidavits of Morales and Dorhauer into what they label as an attack on the legal sufficiency of plaintiffs’ complaint. Those aspects that we can identify as proper challenges to the legal sufficiency of the complaint fail to demonstrate an alternative basis for affirmance.

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

Illinois Collaboration on Youth v. Dimas · filed 2017-06-15

The question presented by a section 2-615 motion 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.” Turner v. Memorial Medical Center, 233 Ill. 2d 494, 499 (2009).

Section 2-615 permits dismissal when the facts pleaded, taken as true with reasonable inferences, do not establish a cause of action.

Sweeney v. City of Decatur · filed 2017-08-02

A section 2-615 motion to dismiss challenges the complaint’s legal sufficiency based on defects apparent on its face. ... Thus, the circuit court’s dismissal with prejudice of his retaliatory discharge claim based on the first amendment was also proper.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal when the complaint alleges no set of facts that would entitle the plaintiff to relief.

Krozel v. Illinois Court of Claims · filed 2017-06-19

In reviewing a dismissal pursuant to both sections 2-615 and 2-619 of the Code (735 ILCS 5/2-615, 2-619 (West 2014)), “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.” Dopkeen v. Whitaker, 399 Ill. App. 3d 682, 684 (2010). Dismissal under either section is proper where plaintiff alleges no set of facts that would entitle her to relief.

A section 2-615 motion tests whether the complaint’s allegations, accepted as true and viewed favorably to the plaintiff, state a claim for relief.

Illinois Collaboration on Youth v. Dimas · filed 2017-09-08

The question presented by a section 2-615 motion 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.” Turner v. Memorial Medical Center, 233 Ill. 2d 494, 499 (2009).

Section 2-615 does not permit dismissal when the complaint’s well-pleaded facts, taken as true, state a claim for relief.

Cochran v. Securitas Security Services USA, Inc. · filed 2017-09-21

Taking these well-pleaded facts as true, we conclude that plaintiff’s third amended complaint states a claim for tortious interference with the right to possess a corpse. The trial court therefore erred in granting defendant’s section 2-615 motion to dismiss.

Section 2-615 allows a motion challenging a complaint’s legal sufficiency based on defects apparent on its face.

Ripes v. Schlechter · filed 2017-10-17

A motion filed pursuant to 2-615 of the Code challenges the legal sufficiency of the complaint based on defects that are apparent on its face.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal for failure to state a claim only when no set of facts could entitle the plaintiff to relief.

Underwood v. City of Chicago · filed 2017-11-09

A section 2-615 motion to dismiss should not be granted unless no set of facts could be proved that would entitle the plaintiff to relief.

Section 2-615 tests whether a complaint is legally sufficient on its face; courts accept well-pleaded facts as true but may disregard conclusions unsupported by factual allegations.

Kagan v. Waldheim Cemetery Co. · filed 2017-11-09

“A section 2-615 motion to dismiss attacks the legal sufficiency of the complaint based upon defects appearing on the face of the complaint.” ... All well-pleaded facts and all reasonable inferences from those facts are taken as true. Where unsupported by allegations of fact, legal and factual conclusions may be disregarded.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal for defects apparent on the face of a complaint when, taking all well-pleaded facts as true, it fails to state a cause of action.

Bocock v. McGuire · filed 2018-01-10

However, we may affirm the circuit court’s judgment on any basis appearing in the record (Gatreaux v. DKW Enterprises, LLC, 2011 IL App (1st) 103482, ¶ 10), and our review of the record indicates that Bocock failed to state a cause of action upon which relief may be granted. See 735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 2014); Heastie v. Roberts, 226 Ill. 2d 515, 531 (2007) (a section 2-615 dismissal is based upon defects that are ... apparent on the face of the complaint). In determining whether the allegations in the complaint are sufficient to state a cause of action upon which relief may be granted, all well-pleaded facts must be taken as true.

Section 2-615 tests the legal sufficiency of a complaint. On review, a court accepts well-pled facts as true and considers the allegations in the light most favorable to the plaintiff.

In re Estate of Shelton · filed 2018-01-30

In reviewing a section 2-615 dismissal, a court must take all well-pled facts as true and determine whether the allegations, considered in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, are sufficient to state a cause of action upon which relief may be granted.

A section 2-615 motion tests a complaint’s legal sufficiency on its face, accepting well-pleaded facts and reasonable inferences as true.

Ferris, Thompson & Zweig, Ltd. v. Esposito · filed 2018-02-09

Motions to dismiss under section 2-615 challenge the legal sufficiency of a complaint based on defects apparent on its face. When reviewing whether a motion to dismiss under section 2-615 should have been granted, we accept as true all well-pleaded facts and all reasonable inferences that may be drawn from those facts.

Section 2-615 tests whether the complaint’s allegations, viewed in the plaintiff’s favor, state a claim for relief.

Village of Belle Rive v. Village of Belle Rive · filed 2018-03-12

When we analyze a section 2-615 motion, we determine 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.

Section 2-615 does not support dismissing a FOIA complaint as unclear when the records request adequately identifies the documents and time frame.

Bocock v. Will County Sheriff · filed 2018-03-27

Construing the pleadings and supporting documents in the light most favorable to plaintiff, his original FOIA request was not fatally unclear. In summary, neither section 2-615 nor section 2-619 of the Code supports dismissal of the third complaint (case No. 16-MR-2527).