735 Ill. Comp. Stat. § 5/2-615

Section 2-615 requires a complaint to support its claim with specific factual allegations rather than unsupported conclusions.

Solomon v. Wiseman · filed 2025-03-11

On a section 2-615 motion to dismiss, plaintiff’s complaint may not rely on mere conclusions of law or fact unsupported by specific factual allegations. ... Therefore, we find that the circuit court properly dismissed plaintiff’s complaint pursuant to section 2-615.

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

Younge v. Berman · filed 2025-03-13

A motion to dismiss under section 2-615 of the Code (735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 2022)) challenges the legal sufficiency of a complaint as a result of defects apparent on its face, while a motion to dismiss based on section 2-619 of the Code (id. § 2-619) admits the legal sufficiency of a complaint, while raising defects, defenses, or other affirmative matters that defeat a claim. ... First, because Younge failed to adequately plead that Berman intended to derail his pending promotion at Newmark, the trial court properly dismissed count I of the second amended complaint.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal of a declaratory judgment complaint that fails to allege an actual controversy and therefore fails to state a cause of action.

Tandon v. Illinois State Police · filed 2025-03-20

A section 2-615 motion challenges the legal sufficiency of the complaint. ... As the plaintiff’s amended complaint does not allege an actual controversy exists between the plaintiff and ISP as required for a declaratory judgment action, the amended complaint fails to state a cause of action and was properly dismissed.

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

Paper Source, LLC v. Sugar Beets, Inc. · filed 2025-03-25

A section 2-615 motion to dismiss “tests the legal sufficiency of the plaintiff’s complaint, asking whether the allegations in the complaint, 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 requires a complaint to allege specific facts supporting the elements of the claim; unsupported conclusions are insufficient.

Solomon v. Wiseman · filed 2025-04-09

On a section 2-615 motion to dismiss, plaintiff’s complaint may not rely on mere conclusions of law or fact unsupported by specific factual allegations. ... Therefore, we find that the circuit court properly dismissed plaintiff’s complaint pursuant to section 2-615.

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

Younge v. Berman · filed 2025-04-25

A motion to dismiss under section 2-615 of the Code (735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 2022)) challenges the legal sufficiency of a complaint as a result of defects apparent on its face, while a motion to dismiss based on section 2-619 of the Code (id. § 2-619) admits the legal sufficiency of a complaint, while raising defects, defenses, or other affirmative matters that defeat a claim. ... First, because Younge failed to adequately plead that Berman intended to derail his pending promotion at Newmark, the trial court properly dismissed count I of the second amended complaint.

Section 2-615 motions test whether a complaint’s allegations, viewed in the plaintiff’s favor, state facts sufficient to establish a cause of action.

Hulsh v. Hulsh · filed 2025-05-22

“A section 2-615 motion tests the legal sufficiency of the plaintiff’s complaint, asking whether the allegations in the complaint, 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 requires a complaint to allege facts supporting a viable claim; conclusory allegations that compensation was excessive are insufficient.

Davis v. Scheck · filed 2025-03-12

A section 2-615 motion to dismiss challenges the legal sufficiency of a complaint, and an order dismissing a complaint is reviewed de novo. ... Illinois is a fact-pleading jurisdiction, and, while the plaintiff is not required to set forth all of their evidence in the complaint, the plaintiff must allege facts sufficient to state a viable cause of action and may not simply allege fact conclusions. ... Stripped of the conclusory descriptions of the compensation paid, there are no well-pled facts that support the allegation that the compensation was excessive or unreasonable.

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

Zibrat v. City of Chicago · filed 2025-05-28

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

Santoyo v. Engle Martin & Associates, LLC · filed 2025-05-28

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

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

Tangorra v. M&K Automotive, Inc. · filed 2025-06-20

A section 2-615 motion attacks the legal sufficiency of a complaint based on defects apparent on its face, including exhibits attached thereto.

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

Sebaggala v. Levinson · filed 2025-06-20

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

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

Webber v. Zimmerlein · filed 2025-06-23(a)

A section 2-615 motion to dismiss challenges the legal sufficiency of a complaint by asserting there are certain defects on its face.

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

Greenswag v. Lieberman Management Services, Inc. · filed 2025-06-25

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

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

Rosenbaum v. Samler · filed 2025-06-27

The trial court dismissed Rosenbaum’s second amended complaint under section 2-615 of the Code, which tests the legal sufficiency of the complaint.

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

Parker v. Jeffreys · filed 2025-07-25

A section 2-615 motion to dismiss tests the legal sufficiency of the complaint. The question on review is whether the allegations of the complaint, 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 permits dismissal when the complaint’s well-pleaded allegations, taken as true and viewed favorably to the plaintiff, do not state a cause of action.

Cicero Gas & Food Inc. v. City of Chicago · filed 2025-08-18

The critical inquiry in determining whether dismissal pursuant to section 2-615 is proper is whether the well-pleaded allegations in the plaintiff’s complaint, taken as true and 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 allows dismissal when a complaint’s well-pleaded facts are legally insufficient to state a claim.

Learco Hospitality, LLC v. Comacchio · filed 2025-10-24

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

Section 2-615 tests the legal sufficiency of the complaint based on what the complaint alleges, not additional claims made in briefs.

High Concept Holdings, Inc. v. Precision Body Works, Inc. · filed 2025-11-07

Although High Concept argues in its briefs that Precision hid payments under all five contracts, the complaint only alleged Precision hid payments under the first contract. See Vernon v. Schuster, 179 Ill. 2d 338, 344 (1997) (explaining that section 2-615 looks to the legal sufficiency of the complaint).

A section 2-615 motion tests whether a pleading states a claim; the court takes well-pleaded facts as true and draws inferences in favor of the non-movant.

In re Marriage of Riaz · filed 2025-06-03

A section 2-615 motion attacks the sufficiency of a complaint and raises the question of whether a complaint states a cause of action upon which relief can be granted. ... We find that the trial court not only failed to give proper regard to the disclosure provisions of the settlement agreement, the court also erred when it improperly resolved a disputed question of fact and impermissibly drew inferences against petitioner, despite her being the non-movant to a motion to dismiss.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal only when the complaint’s well-pleaded facts, taken as true, cannot establish a claim for relief.

Rodgers v. Pritzker · filed 2025-10-06(a)

A complaint 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.” Id.

A declaratory judgment count that alleges all elements of the claim is sufficient to survive a section 2-615 motion to dismiss.

Tomasello v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. · filed 2025-06-17

Plaintiff’s complaint alleges all of the elements of a claim for declaratory judgment. Therefore, count I of the complaint is sufficient to survive defendant’s 2-615 motion to dismiss. To the extent the trial court dismissed count I of plaintiff’s complaint pursuant to section 2-615, the trial court’s judgment is reversed.

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

Apps v. Crete Township Highway Commissioner · filed 2025-08-28

A section 2-615 motion to dismiss contests the legal sufficiency of a complaint based on defects apparent on its face. ... The circuit court’s dismissal, with prejudice, and granting of Bukowski’s 2-615 motion to dismiss is reversed.

Section 2-615 tests whether the complaint’s factual allegations would entitle the plaintiff to relief if proven.

Dorman v. Madison County Board · filed 2025-09-04

The question presented by a section 2-615 motion is whether the factual allegations in the complaint would entitle plaintiff to relief if proven.

Section 2-615 tests whether a complaint alleges sufficient facts to state a cause of action, accepting well-pleaded facts and reasonable inferences as true.

Wader v. Macon County, Illinois and Illinois Dept. of Transportation · filed 2025-10-17

Rather than considering whether Macon County satisfied its initial burden to show that the plaintiff’s claim was barred under the Tort Immunity Act, the trial court first considered the legal sufficiency of the plaintiff’s complaint, effectively transforming the section 2-619(a)(9) motion into a motion to dismiss for failure to plead sufficient facts to state a cause of action under section 2-615 of the Code (735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 2022)). ... Nevertheless, the factual allegations in the complaint were sufficient to state a cause of action and to inform Macon County of the claim it was called upon to defend.

Section 2-615 permits a motion challenging the sufficiency of a complaint based on defects appearing on its face.

Project Is 43:19, LLC Vanderburgh House, LLC · filed 2025-07-24

In contrast, motions brought under section 2-615 are intended to attack the sufficiency of the complaint based on defects appearing on its face.

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

Burnette v. Burnette · filed 2025-08-11

Section 2-615 of the Code of Civil Procedure allows for the dismissal of a complaint for failing to establish a cause of action upon which relief could be granted.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal when the pleadings make clear that no set of facts could entitle the plaintiff to relief.

Keagy v. New River Royalty, LLC. · filed 2025-10-20

Only when it is clearly apparent from the pleadings no set of facts can be proved entitling the plaintiff to recovery should a court dismiss a complaint under section 2-615.

Section 2-615 requires a court to decide whether the pleaded facts, construed in the claimant’s favor, state a cause of action.

TD Bank USA v. Dandridge · filed 2026-03-05

When ruling on a section 2-615 motion to dismiss, the question is whether “the allegations of the complaint, construed in the light most favorable to the petitioner, state sufficient facts to establish a cause of action upon which relief may be granted.” Dent v. Constellation NewEnergy, Inc., 2022 IL 126795, ¶ 25.

Section 2-615 requires a court considering a motion to dismiss to take well-pleaded facts as true and dismiss only when no provable set of facts would entitle the plaintiff to relief.

North Mill Equipment Finance LLC v. Elemental Center Ltd · filed 2025-11-14

All well-pleaded facts are taken as true, and a court should dismiss under section 2-615 only where no set of facts can be proven which would entitle plaintiff to recovery. ... Further, in treating the response as a motion to dismiss, the court failed to take all well-pleaded facts in North Mill’s amended 2-1401 petition as true and instead held North Mill to an impossible standard.

Under section 2-615, the court reads a complaint’s allegations in the plaintiff’s favor to decide whether they state a cause of action.

Reynolds v. State Farm Insurance Co. · filed 2025-12-10

When considering the sufficiency of a complaint under section 2-615, we must determine whether the allegations in the complaint, construed in a light most favorable to the plaintiff, are sufficient to set forth a cause of action upon which relief may be granted.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal only when the complaint’s allegations, viewed favorably to the plaintiff, cannot state a cause of action.

Bradish v. Aperion Care Marseilles, Inc. · filed 2025-12-19

The crucial inquiry in deciding a section 2-615 motion to dismiss is whether the allegations in the complaint, when 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 permits dismissal when defects on the face of a complaint leave it legally insufficient to state a claim.

K D Group Enterprises, LLC v. Village of Oak Park · filed 2025-12-19

A section 2-615 motion to dismiss challenges the legal sufficiency of the complaint by claiming defects exist on the face of the complaint. ... This court will affirm the dismissal based only on the pleadings where we find that no set of facts can be proven which would entitle the plaintiff to the relief sought.

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

Hart v. Wright · filed 2025-12-31

“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.” ... Plaintiff’s request for mandamus relief fails as a matter of law because he challenges discretionary decisions made by trial judges over the course of judicial proceedings.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal when a complaint fails to plead facts satisfying every element of its claim.

Geragos & Geragos v. Osundairo · filed 2026-01-16

We conclude that plaintiffs’ first amended complaint was properly dismissed under section 2-615 where it failed to fully satisfy all elements to raise a cause of action for malicious prosecution.

Section 2-615 tests whether a complaint pleads facts sufficient to state a claim; dismissal is improper if the pleaded facts could entitle the plaintiff to relief.

John's Pro-Tree Service, Inc. v. Village of Dolton · filed 2026-01-29

“A section 2-615 motion tests the legal sufficiency of the plaintiff's complaint, asking whether the allegations in the ... complaint, construed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, state sufficient facts to establish a cause of action upon which relief may be granted.” ... We find that it has, so it should not have been dismissed.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal only when the complaint’s allegations, taken as true and construed favorably to the plaintiff, cannot state a cause of action.

O'Sullivan v. Martin · filed 2026-03-19

At issue is whether the circuit court erred in dismissing O’Sullivan’s claims with prejudice under section 2-615 of the Code. ... Accordingly, for the foregoing reasons, we conclude that O’Sullivan stated a cause of action for defamation per se with respect to allegations (b), (c), (d), (f), and (m), only and that the circuit court erred in dismissing the claim.

Section 2-615 tests whether a complaint states a cause of action; an argument requiring a factual inquiry into the merits does not support dismissal under it.

Dungan v. Eggleston Street, LLC · filed 2026-04-13

Because Eggleston’s argument was not based only on whether count III sufficiently stated a cause of action, we reject it as presenting an improper basis for dismissal under section 2-615.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal when a complaint’s allegations fail to state a legally sufficient claim.

Colatorti v. Republican Legislative Committee for the Twenty-Sixth Legislative District · filed 2026-04-17

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. ... Nevertheless, defendants contend that because plaintiff’s entire claim for declaratory judgment rests on a faulty premise, the trial court properly dismissed it. We agree.

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

Miller v. Fertility Centers of Illinois · filed 2025-12-26

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

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

Weiland v. 1529-37 Farwell Condominium Association · filed 2026-04-08

That complaint was therefore properly dismissed under section 2-615, as it fails to state a cause of action upon which relief can be granted.

Section 2-615 governs motions to dismiss a complaint for failure to state a cause of action.

Silverthorn Development Co. v. Sycamore Creek Homeowners Assoc. · filed 2025-12-01

Motions to dismiss for failure to state a cause of action are governed by section 2-615 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 2022)).

An amended ordinance citation states a claim under section 2-615 when it alleges the specific conduct constituting the charged violation.

City of Naperville v. Penick · filed 2026-04-13

In this case, however, while the initial citation specified only the date, time, and location of the offense charged, the City subsequently amended the citation to include the allegation that defendant “committed the offense of disorderly conduct in that he stood close to the victim with clenched fists while cursing and speaking loudly.” Accordingly, the trial court properly rejected defendant’s argument that the citation failed to state a claim.

Section 2-615(a) allows dismissal when defects apparent on the face of a complaint show that its allegations do not state a cause of action.

Walters v. Ogle County Sheriff · filed 2026-05-08(a)

A section 2-615(a) motion to dismiss tests the legal sufficiency of the complaint based on defects apparent on its face when the facts pleaded do not state a cause of action against the defendant.

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

3 R Health Care Products v. Cardinal Health 110 · filed 2026-05-26

A dismissal under section 2-615 of the Code of Civil Procedure concerns the legal sufficiency of the complaint.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal only when the complaint cannot state facts that would entitle the plaintiff to relief.

ACA Illinois Student Housing v. Larson Company, LLC · filed 2026-04-23

A complaint should only be dismissed under section 2-615 where no set of facts can be provided which would entitle the plaintiff to recovery.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal of a complaint that lacks specific facts sufficient to state a claim.

Pence v. Kelly · filed 2026-04-30

A section 2-615 motion to dismiss contests the legal sufficiency of a complaint based on defects apparent on its face. ... Accordingly, we find the trial court did not err in dismissing count I of the second amended complaint with prejudice because plaintiff failed to allege facts with sufficient specificity to suggest that section 8.1 of the FOID Act, as it applies to plaintiff’s situation, is unconstitutional.

Section 2-615 tests whether a complaint states a legally recognized claim, assuming its well-pleaded facts are true and drawing reasonable inferences in the plaintiff’s favor.

Arcangel v. Yardi Systems, Inc. · filed 2026-05-22

A section 2-615 motion asks whether, assuming all well-pleaded facts in the complaint are true and drawing all reasonable inferences in the plaintiff’s favor, the complaint states a legally recognized cause of action.

Section 2-615 does not permit dismissal of a complaint as to all plaintiffs when the stated pleading defects do not apply to one of them.

Aran Holdings, LLC v. Aranauskas · filed 2026-06-23

Neither of the reasons provided by the trial court for dismissing the complaint applied to Melck. Since the trial court did not distinguish Melck when it dismissed the second-amended complaint as to all plaintiffs, we find that dismissal pursuant to section 2-615 was erroneous and reverse the judgment.

Section 2-615 requires a complaint to allege facts supporting a legally recognizable cause of action.

Fornadel v. Kelly · filed 2026-05-26

However, to survive a section 2-615 motion to dismiss, their complaint must allege facts to bring their claims within a legally recognizable cause of action.

Section 2-615 tests whether a complaint’s allegations, viewed in the plaintiff’s favor, state a cause of action on which relief can be granted.

Tate Road Solar 1 LLC v. County of Winnebago · filed 2026-06-02

“A section 2-615 motion attacks the legal sufficiency of the complaint.” Howard v. Weitekamp, 2015 IL App (4th) 150037, ¶ 12. This motion raises the question of whether the complaint’s allegations, when viewed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, sufficiently state a cause of action on which relief can be granted.

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

Mannie v. Edge Brook Medical Clinic · filed 2026-05-29

A motion to dismiss brought pursuant to section 2-615 is “a facial challenge asserting that the complaint fails to state a cause of action upon which relief can be granted.” Village of Willow Springs v. Village of Lemont, 2016 IL App (1st) 152670, ¶ 22. The question raised by such a motion ... 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.” Loman v. Freeman, 229 Ill. 2d 104, 109 (2008).

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

Muhammad v. Riverside Healthcare · filed 2026-06-15

Dismissal pursuant to section 2- 615 is proper when it is apparent that no set of facts can be proven that would entitle the plaintiff to relief.

Section 2-615 requires a court reviewing a dismissal for legal insufficiency to accept well-pleaded facts as true and affirm only when no set of facts would entitle the plaintiff to relief.

LVNV Funding v. Trice · filed 2011-06-30

Here, LVNV moved to dismiss the section 2–1401 motion as legally insufficient. See 735 ILCS 5/2–615 (West 2008); Oliveira v. Amoco Oil Co., 201 Ill. 2d 134, 147 (2002). For purposes of our review of the judgment, we must accept as true all well-pleaded facts in Trice’s motion to vacate the judgment. Oliveira, 201 Ill. 2d at 147. We will affirm the dismissal “only where no set of facts can be proved under pleadings which set forth a cause of action entitling the plaintiff to relief.” Bank of Northern Illinois v. Nugent, 223 Ill. App. 3d 1, 9 (1991). However, the petition must set forth sufficient facts to show entitlement to the relief sought. Barham v. Knickrehm, 277 Ill. App. 3d 1034, 1037 (1996).

A section 2-615 motion does not require dismissal of an apparent agency claim merely because the complaint alleges an ongoing physician-patient relationship.

Malanowski v. Jabamoni · filed 1997-11-26

However, for pleading purposes, plaintiffs allegation that decedent was a regular patient of Dr. Jabamoni is not so inconsistent with plaintiff’s claim of apparent agency as to require dismissal of plaintiffs cause of action.

A complaint challenged under section 2-615 must allege ultimate facts sufficient to state a cause of action, but need not plead evidence.

Roark v. MacOupin Creek Drainage District · filed 2000-09-25

A plaintiff is not required to plead evidence in his complaint but is only required to allege ultimate facts. ... Roark alleged sufficient facts to state a cause of action. Therefore, the trial court erred by dismissing the portion of Roark’s amended complaint requesting injunctive relief.

Section 2-615 tests whether a complaint states a legally sufficient claim based on its allegations.

Faville v. Burns · filed 2011-09-30

A section 2-615 motion to dismiss challenges the legal sufficiency of a complaint based on defects apparent on its face. ... Accordingly, we find the trial court erred in dismissing count II of plaintiffs' complaint under section 2-615 of the Code.

On a section 2-615 motion, courts take well-pled facts as true and determine whether the complaint states a viable cause of action.

Dehart v. Dehart · filed 2012-03-06

A motion to dismiss pursuant to section 2-615 attacks the legal sufficiency of the complaint. ... Accepting the well-pled facts as true, and interpreting each in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, the complaint sufficiently sets forth that James was a natural object, either by blood or affection, of Donald’s bounty, who should have been considered as a recipient of a bequest.

Section 2-615 tests whether a complaint states a legally sufficient claim; dismissal is improper when the complaint adequately pleads claims and the asserted immunity does not apply.

Platinum Partners Value Arbitrage Fund v. Chicago Board Options Exchange · filed 2012-08-10

A motion to dismiss under section 2-615 of the Illinois Code of Civil Procedure challenges the legal sufficiency of the complaint by alleging defects on its face. ... Because defendants CBOE’s and OCC’s conduct in their private dissemination of the price adjustment information is not protected by the doctrine of regulatory immunity and because plaintiff adequately pled multiple causes of action against defendants, the trial court erred in granting defendants’ section 2-615 motion to dismiss by finding immunity.

A complaint alleging that an employer abused its contractual discretion by arbitrarily withholding a reasonably expected bonus can survive a section 2-615 motion to dismiss.

McCleary v. Wells Fargo Securities, LLC · filed 2015-05-07

Where a plaintiff has pled that he had a reasonable expectation to a bonus from a defendant that abused its broad contractual discretion by arbitrarily withholding the bonus in a manner not reasonably anticipated by the parties at the time of contract formation, a valid cause of action has been sufficiently pled to withstand a section 2-615 motion to dismiss.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal of a count that fails to plead a legally recognized cause of action, even when its well-pleaded facts are accepted as true.

Gajda v. Steel Solutions Firm, Inc. · filed 2015-08-20

A section 2-615 motion challenges the legal sufficiency of a cause of action based on defects apparent on the face of the complaint. ... However, even accepting as true all well-pleaded facts in the complaint, plaintiffs could not recover under count I without pleading a legally recognized cause of action.

Section 2-615 tests whether a complaint alleges enough facts to state a claim. A taxpayer seeking declaratory relief must plead liability to replenish the public funds allegedly misspent.

Veazey v. Rich Township High School District 227 · filed 2016-09-16

Finally, we address under section 2-615 the sufficiency of the allegations of Veazey’s complaint. ... In his ... second amended complaint, Veazey identified himself as a taxpayer residing in the District’s boundaries and pled the illegality of the Board’s vote, but failed to specifically plead that, as a taxpayer, he has been or will be liable to replenish the District’s misappropriation of funds, i.e., the payments made to Imoukhuede in conjunction with her reinstatement. Schacht v. Brown, 2015 IL App (1st) 133035, ¶ 20. Because such allegations are absent, Veazey’s complaint is “fatally defective.”

A section 2-615 motion tests whether the complaint alleges sufficient facts to state a claim; the court may grant leave to amend a curable pleading defect.

Veazey v. Rich Township High School District 227 · filed 2016-09-30

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.” ... But Veazey advances arguments on appeal on this point and he would likely be able to cure this defect if given leave to amend.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal of a negligent spoliation complaint that insufficiently pleads a cause of action, with leave to replead.

JACKSON BY JACKSON v. Michael Reese Hosp. and Medical Center · filed 1997-12-22

We affirm the trial court’s finding that plaintiffs failed to state a cause of action under the X-Rajr Retention Act, and we affirm the trial court’s finding that plaintiffs failed to sufficiently plead a cause of action for negligent spoliation under section 2 — 615 standards. However, we remand to the trial court to allow plaintiffs to replead the negligent spoliation of evidence claim.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal of a negligent spoliation claim that is insufficiently pleaded, with leave to replead.

Jackson v. Michael Reese Hospital & Medical Center · filed 1997-12-22

We affirm the trial court's finding that plaintiffs failed to state a cause of action under the X-Ray Retention Act, and we affirm the trial court's finding that plaintiffs failed to sufficiently plead a cause of action for negligent spoliation under section 2-615 standards. However, we remand to the trial court to allow plaintiffs to replead the negligent spoliation of evidence claim.

A complaint based on a judicial circuit’s personnel policy manual can be sufficient to state a wrongful discharge claim against the State under section 2-615.

Rudolph v. State · filed 2000-10-04

Respondents motion, pursuant to section 2 — 615 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/2 — 615), focuses on the Claimants failure to attach to his pleading the two employee “handbooks” on which Claimant predicates, in part, his wrongful termination claim: a 16th Judicial Circuit Court services personnel policy manual and a Kane County personnel policy handbook. ... We have dealt with the attachment issue, and have dismissed Kane County, and find that as a pleading matter, the claim against the State based on the 16th Judicial Circuit Court services personnel policy manual (and on the Kane County manual if it is shown that the 16th Circuit adopted that manual as its own) is sufficient to state a claim.

Section 2-615's complaint sufficiency standard applies to a Rule 224 petition seeking the identity of an anonymous potential defamation defendant.

Maxon v. Ottawa Publishing Co. · filed 2010-06-01

We therefore hold that subjecting a Rule 224 petition to the same level of scrutiny afforded the sufficiency of a complaint pursuant to section 2-615 will address any constitutional concerns arising from disclosing the identity of any potential defendant.

A section 2-615 motion requires dismissal when the pleading lacks sufficient facts to sustain a recognized cause of action after unsupported conclusions and inferences are removed.

In re Estate of Baumgarten · filed 2012-07-18

After stripping the pleading of unsupported conclusions and inferences, sufficient facts must remain to sustain a cause of action.

Section 2-615 requires courts to draw reasonable inferences from well-pleaded facts in the plaintiff’s favor when deciding whether a claim can proceed.

In re Estate of Baker · filed 2023-09-14

Taken as a whole and interpreting the well-pleaded facts in the light most favorable to her, Natosha’s allegations support the specific inferences that James was unable to understand the consequences of executing a will and did not recognize or remember the loved ones he might choose to include in his will. ... Consequently, the circuit court erred in granting Randal’s section 2-615 motion to dismiss.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal when a complaint alleges only speculative harm and fails to plead a present injury or damages required for its claims.

Yu v. International Business MacHines Corp. · filed 2000-06-30

As plaintiff failed to allege that the Medic system actually malfunctioned and caused damages due to the Y2K defect, we hold that the trial court properly dismissed plaintiffs complaint under section 2 — 615.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal of a legal malpractice complaint arising from SVP proceedings when the plaintiff does not allege that he is not an SVP.

Powers v. Doll · filed 2022-03-17

We determine here that the result, the dismissal of Powers’s complaint, was correct because, under section 2-615 of the Code (735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 2020)), his complaint failed to state a claim for legal malpractice. ... Just as a criminal defendant cannot state a claim for legal malpractice without asserting actual innocence (id. ¶ 40), we determine that an SVP must plead that he is not an SVP in order to assert a claim for damages arising from legal malpractice in the underlying SVP proceedings.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal of fraud claims that lack allegations of detrimental reliance.

Blitz Capital Group, LLC v. North Dearborn Property, LLC · filed 2026-04-10(a)

Blitz asserts these allegations survive a section 2-615 motion to dismiss. We disagree. ... Without allegations of detrimental reliance, Blitz failed to state a claim for common law or statutory fraud.

A dismissal under section 2-615 for failure to plead sufficient facts is reviewed de novo.

Argonaut Ins. Co. v. SAFWAY STEEL PRODUCTS · filed 2004-12-30

Therefore the dismissal was pursuant to section 2-615 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 2000)), and our review is de novo.

Section 2-615 requires a court reviewing a motion to dismiss to accept well-pleaded facts as true and decide whether the complaint, read favorably to the plaintiff, states a cause of action.

King v. First Capital Financial Services Corp. · filed 2005-04-21

When the legal sufficiency of a complaint is challenged by a section 2 — 615 motion to dismiss, 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.

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

Covarrubias v. Bancomer, S.A. · filed 2004-08-09

Because the court dismissed the complaint pursuant to section 2 — 615 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/2 — 615 (West 2002)), we review the judgment de novo. Oliveira v. Amoco Oil Co., 201 Ill. 2d 134, 147-48 (2002). We must determine whether the facts alleged, construed in the light most favorable to plaintiff, adequately state a cause of action.

A dismissal under section 2-615 for failure to state a cause of action is reviewed de novo, with well pleaded facts accepted as true and allegations construed in the plaintiff's favor.

Doe v. North Central Behavioral Health System Inc. · filed 2004-08-26

The dismissal of the plaintiffs' claims under section 2-615 for failure to state a cause of action is reviewed de novo. ... In reviewing the complaint, the court must accept all well pleaded facts as true, the pleadings are to be liberally construed with a view to doing substantial justice between the parties, and the allegations of the complaint should be liberally construed in favor of the plaintiffs.

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

Doe v. North Central Behavioral Health Systems, Inc. · filed 2004-08-26

The dismissal of the plaintiffs’ claims under section 2-615 for failure to state a cause of action is reviewed de novo .

A dismissal of a declaratory judgment action under section 2-615 is reviewed de novo.

Northern Trust Co. v. County of Lake · filed 2004-11-04

In light of this recent authority, we overturn our decision in Stone regarding the applicable standard of review, and we hold that a trial court’s decision to dismiss a declaratory judgment action under section 2 — 615 or section 2 — 619 of the Code is subject to de novo review.

A section 2-615 motion challenges the legal sufficiency of a complaint based on defects on its face, and an order granting or denying the motion is reviewed de novo.

Young v. Bryco Arms · filed 2004-11-18

Thus, the certified question was similar in nature to a motion to dismiss under section 2-615 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 2000)), which challenges the legal sufficiency of a complaint by alleging defects on its face. We review de novo an order granting or denying a section 2-615 motion ( Wakulich v. Mraz, 203 Ill.2d 223, 228, 271 Ill.Dec. 649, 785 N.E.2d 843 (2003)), and, therefore, we apply the same standard of review to the appellate court's answer to the certified question in the present case.

Section 2-615 motions to dismiss a declaratory judgment action are reviewed de novo.

Adkins Energy, LLC v. Delta-T Corp. · filed 2004-03-31

A trial court's grant of a section 2-615 motion to dismiss a declaratory judgment action is subject to de novo review.

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

Martinez v. Department of Public Aid · filed 2004-05-25

We review the trial court order dismissing plaintiffs complaint under sections 2 — 615 and 2 — 619 of the Code de novo.

Section 2-615 provides a pleading based motion to dismiss procedure requiring review of legal sufficiency and acceptance of well pleaded facts as true.

Roland MacHinery Co. v. Reed · filed 2003-06-20

We review de novo a trial court’s decision granting or denying a section 2—615 motion to dismiss, and we accept all well-pleaded facts in the complaint as true.

Section 2-615 dismissals are reviewed de novo on appeal.

Canel v. Topinka · filed 2003-06-30

This court reviews the granting of motions to dismiss pursuant to sections 2-615 and 2-619 de novo.

Section 2-615 dismissal orders are reviewed de novo.

Casanova v. City of Chicago · filed 2003-06-30

The circuit court’s order dismissing Casanova’s second amended petition under section 2 — 615 and section 2 — 619 involves questions of law and is therefore reviewed de novo.

Section 2-615 requires de novo review and permits dismissal only when the complaint cannot support relief under any provable set of facts.

Board of Education of Indian Prairie School District No. 204 v. Du Page County Election Commission · filed 2003-07-15

Because this cause comes to us following a dismissal pursuant to section 2 — 615 of the Civil Practice Law (735 ILCS 5/2 — 615 (West 2002)), our review is de novo. Safeway Insurance Co. v. Daddono, 334 Ill. App. 3d 215, 218 (2002). All well-pleaded facts in plaintiff’s complaint and all reasonable inferences capable of being drawn therefrom must be taken as true, and the allegation must be viewed in the light most favorable to plaintiff.

On a section 2-615 motion, courts accept well-pleaded facts as true and draw reasonable inferences in favor of the nonmoving party.

Board of Library Trustees of Westmont v. Cinco Construction, Inc. · filed 1995-12-08

It is well settled that when we review the trial court’s ruling on a section 2 — 615 motion, we accept as true all well-pleaded facts and draw from those facts all reasonable inferences which may be deemed favorable to the non-moving party.

A dismissal under section 2-615 presents a question of law reviewed de novo.

Jackson v. Hilton Hotels Corp. · filed 1995-12-29

As in all section 2 — 615 dismissals, the appeal is from a determination of issues of law and therefore appropriately subjected to a de novo review.

On review of a dismissal under section 2-615, the court takes all properly pleaded facts as true.

Zielinski v. Miller · filed 1995-12-29

In reviewing the dismissal of actions pursuant to sections 2 — 615 and 2 — 619, the reviewing court must take all facts properly pleaded as true.

On appeal from an order granting a section 2-615 motion, the court reviews the complaint de novo and is not limited to arguments the movant preserved.

Mt. Zion State Bank & Trust v. Consolidated Communications, Inc. · filed 1995-11-02(a)

A section 2-615 motion attacks the sufficiency of the complaint. On appeal from an order granting such a motion, we review the complaint, de novo, as though it were before the trial court. Thus, whether Consolidated properly preserved any argument is neither a limitation on the nature or the parameters of our review.

On appeal from a section 2-615 dismissal, the court reviews whether the complaint alleges the essential elements of the cause of action.

Phillips v. Cox · filed 1994-04-13

The question before this court is whether plaintiff has stated a cause of action sufficient to survive a motion to dismiss for failure to state a cause of action. (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1991, ch. 110, par. 2 — 615 (now 735 ILCS 5/2 — 615 (West 1992)).) On appeal, this court reviews only the legal sufficiency of the complaint by determining whether the essential elements of the cause of action were alleged.

Section 2-615 tests whether a complaint sufficiently states a cause of action; the merits are not at issue.

Talbert v. Home Sav. of America, FA · filed 1994-07-19

The standard of review on appeal from a section 2 — 615 motion to dismiss is whether the complaint sufficiently states a cause of action; the merits of the case are not at issue.

Section 2-615 requires courts reviewing a dismissal to consider the complaint in the light most favorable to the plaintiff and determine whether its alleged facts state a cause of action.

Stinson v. Physicians Immediate Care, Ltd. · filed 1995-02-16

In reviewing the dismissal of a complaint pursuant to section 2 — 615, we must determine whether the complaint, when considered in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, alleges facts sufficient to set forth a cause of action.

On appeal from a section 2-615 dismissal, the court asks whether the complaint sufficiently states a cause of action.

American Health Care Providers, Inc. v. County of Cook · filed 1994-08-09

The standard of review on appeal from a section 2 — 615 motion to dismiss is whether the complaint sufficiently states a cause of action.

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

Charles v. Seigfried · filed 1995-03-30

The standard of review on appeal from a motion to dismiss a complaint under section 2-615 is whether the complaint alleges sufficient facts which, if proved, would entitle the plaintiff to relief.

Section 2-615 requires a court reviewing a dismissal to decide whether the dismissed counts state causes of action upon which relief can be granted.

Metrick v. Chatz · filed 1994-08-18

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

On a section 2-615 motion to dismiss, the court takes properly pleaded facts as true.

Zielinski v. Miller · filed 1996-02-16

In reviewing the dismissal of actions pursuant to sections 2-615 and 2-619, the reviewing court must take all facts properly pleaded as true.

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

Aroonsakul v. Shannon · filed 1996-04-26

In ruling on a section 2-615 motion to dismiss, the court must accept as true all well-pleaded facts in the complaint and all reasonable inferences which can be drawn therefrom.

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

Indlecoffer v. Village of Wadsworth · filed 1996-08-12

In reviewing the dismissal of a complaint under section 2-615, a reviewing court must determine whether the complaint, when viewed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, alleged facts sufficient to establish a cause of action upon which relief may be granted. ... A court should grant a section 2-615 motion to dismiss only if it clearly appears that no set of facts could ever be proved that would entitle the plaintiff to recover.

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

Cult Awareness Network v. Church of Scientology International · filed 1996-03-29

This court applies a de novo standard of review where a complaint is dismissed pursuant to section 2 — 615 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/2 — 615 (West 1992)).

A section 2-615 dismissal receives de novo review, with well-pleaded allegations accepted as true and reasonable inferences drawn in the plaintiff’s favor.

Garcia v. Overload Bond & Investment Co. · filed 1996-07-05

Because the counts at issue were dismissed pursuant to section 2 — 615, we review the allegations of the complaint de novo, accepting as true all well-pleaded allegations and drawing all reasonable inferences in a light most favorable to the plaintiff.

A dismissal under section 2-615 is reviewed de novo, with pleaded facts taken as true and viewed in the plaintiff’s favor.

Noyola v. Board of Educ. of Chicago · filed 1996-09-30

We note that the trial court’s dismissal of this cause under sections 2 — 615 and 2 — 619 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/2 — 615, 2 — 619 (West 1992)) is subject to our de novo review. ... Accordingly, for our analysis here we take all facts pled by plaintiffs as true and view them in a light most favorable to them.

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

Gaebler v. New Mexico Potash Corp. · filed 1996-11-27

We note that the trial court’s dismissal of this cause under section 2 — 615 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/2 — 615 (West 1994)) is subject to our de novo review.

Section 2-615 requires a court reviewing a pleading dismissal to assess the complaint’s legal sufficiency while accepting all well-pleaded facts as true.

Adame v. Munoz · filed 1997-03-07

It is well settled that, on review of an order of dismissal under section 2 — 615 of the Code, this court must determine the legal sufficiency of the complaint taking as true all well-pleaded facts.

A dismissal under section 2-615 is reviewed de novo, accepting well-pleaded allegations as true and drawing reasonable inferences in the plaintiff’s favor.

Amato v. Greenquist · filed 1997-04-16

Because the counts at issue were dismissed pursuant to section 2—615, we review the allegations of the complaint de nova, accepting as true all well-pleaded allegations and drawing all reasonable inferences in a light most favorable to the plaintiff.

A dismissal under section 2-615 is reviewed de novo to determine whether the complaint states a cause of action.

Barille v. Sears Roebuck and Co. · filed 1997-06-06

On review of the dismissal of an action under section 2 — 615, the appellate court reviews the complaint de nova.

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

Barille v. Sears, Roebuck & Co. · filed 1997-06-06

On review of the dismissal of an action under section 2-615, the appellate court reviews the complaint de novo .

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

Stratman v. Brent · filed 1997-08-06

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

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

Board of Trustees of Community College, Dist. v. Coopers and Lybrand LLP · filed 1998-05-05

The trial court granted the third-party defendants’ motion to dismiss Arthur Andersen’s third-party claims for contribution pursuant to sections 2 — 615 and 2 — 619 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/2 — 615, 2 — 619 (West 1992)). We review the trial court’s ruling under both of these sections de novo.

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

Bd. of Trustees v. Coopers & Lybrand LLP · filed 1998-05-05

The trial court granted the third-party defendants’ motion to dismiss Arthur Andersen’s third-party claims for contribution pursuant to sections 2-615 and 2-619 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/2-615, 2-619 (West 1992)). We review the trial court's ruling under both of these sections de novo .

On review of a section 2-615 dismissal, courts accept well-pleaded facts and reasonable inferences as true and interpret them in the nonmoving party's favor.

Jespersen v. Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing Co. · filed 1998-06-18

This case is before the court on review from an order granting a motion to dismiss the plaintiff's complaint for failure to state a cause of action for breach of contract. 735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 1994). In reviewing such a case, all well-pleaded facts and all reasonable inferences from them are admitted as true and interpreted in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party.

Section 2-615 permits dismissal for failure to state a cause of action; review is de novo and assumes the truth of well-pleaded factual allegations.

Doe v. McKay · filed 1998-06-18

The circuit court dismissed the challenged portions of the amended complaint under section 2-615 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 1994)) for failure to state a cause of action. Our review of that ruling is de novo ( Vernon v. Schuster, 179 Ill.2d 338, 344, 228 Ill.Dec. 195, 688 N.E.2d 1172 (1997)), and it requires us to assume the truth of all well-pleaded factual allegations in the plaintiff's amended complaint ( People ex rel. Daley v. Datacom Systems Corp., 146 Ill.2d 1, 11, 165 Ill.Dec. 655, 585 N.E.2d 51 (1991)).

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

Schiffner v. Motorola, Inc. · filed 1998-06-30

We review de novo the dismissal of a complaint under section 2 — 615 for failure to state a cause of action upon which relief can be granted.

On review of a section 2-615 dismissal, the court takes well-pleaded facts and reasonable inferences as true and affirms only if no set of provable facts would entitle the plaintiff to recover.

A.P. Properties, Inc. v. Goshinsky · filed 1998-08-07

In reviewing an order that granted a section 2 — 615 motion to dismiss, a reviewing court should take as true all well-pleaded facts in the complaint and all reasonable inferences from those well-pleaded facts and should affirm the order if it clearly appears that no set of facts could ever be proved that would entitle the plaintiff to recover.

When reviewing a section 2 — 615 dismissal, a court accepts well-pleaded facts as true and draws reasonable inferences in favor of the nonmoving party.

Scott v. Aldi, Inc. · filed 1998-11-13

It is well settled that when reviewing the trial court’s ruling on a section 2 — 615 motion, this court accepts as true all well-pleaded facts and draws from those facts all reasonable inferences which may be deemed favorable to the nonmoving party.

A dismissal under section 2-615(a) is a decision as a matter of law and is reviewed de novo.

Estate of Pessin v. Department of Transporation · filed 1999-01-20(a)

The trial court’s decision was made as a matter of law. 735 ILCS 5/2—615(a) (West 1996). Consequently, our review is de novo.

A ruling on a section 2—615 motion to dismiss is reviewed de novo because it presents only a question of law.

R-Five, Inc. v. Shadeco, Inc. · filed 1999-06-04

We review de novo a ruling on a motion to dismiss under either section 2—615 or section 2—619 because the resolution of either motion involves only a question of law.

Section 2-615 dismissals for failure to state a cause of action are reviewed de novo.

Shubert v. Federal Express Corp. · filed 1999-06-30

Since the question of whether a complaint states a cause of action is one of law, our review of a trial court’s dismissal of a complaint pursuant to section 2—615 is de novo.

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

Olczyk v. Cerion Technologies, Inc. · filed 1999-11-19

Dismissals of complaints under section 2 — 615 are reviewable de novo.

A judgment on the pleadings under section 2-615(e) is reviewed de novo.

People Ex Rel. Ryan v. Village of Hanover Park · filed 1999-12-30(e)

The trial court granted the People’s motion for judgment on the pleadings pursuant to section 2 — 615(e) of the Illinois Code of Civil Procedure. 735 ILCS 5/2 — 615(e) (West 1998). We review that determination de novo.

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

Stebbings v. University of Chicago · filed 2000-03-14

We review a section 2 — 615 dismissal under a de novo standard.

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

Ciccone v. Dominick's Finer Foods, Inc. · filed 2000-05-30

Our review of the trial court’s dismissal of count I of Dominick’s third-party complaint pursuant to section 2 — 615 is de novo.

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

McGuire v. Ameritech Cellular Corp. · filed 2000-05-31

We review a dismissal under section 2 — 615 de novo.

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

McGrath v. CCC Information Services, Inc. · filed 2000-06-06

A trial court’s dismissal of an action pursuant to section 2 — 615 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/2 — 615 (West 1996)) for failure to state a cause of action is reviewed de novo.

Dismissals under section 2-615 are reviewed de novo.

Moriarty v. Greene · filed 2000-06-28

We review dismissals under section 2 — 615 de novo.

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

Moriarty v. Green · filed 2000-06-28

We review dismissals under section 2-615 de novo .

On appeal from a section 2-615 dismissal, the court asks whether the complaint alleges sufficient facts that, if proved, would entitle the plaintiff to relief.

Morris B. Chapman & Associates, Ltd. v. Kitzman · filed 2000-11-16

In Illinois, the standard of review on appeal from a motion to dismiss pursuant to section 2-615 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 1996)) is whether the complaint alleges sufficient facts which, if proved, would entitle the plaintiff to relief.

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

Park Superintendents' Professional Ass'n v. Ryan · filed 2001-02-21

We review de novo the dismissal of a complaint pursuant to section 2 — 615 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/3 — 615 (West 1998)).

A dismissal under section 2-615 presents a question of law reviewed de novo on appeal.

Fiumetto v. Garrett Enterprises, Inc. · filed 2001-04-25

The propriety of a dismissal under section 2-615 is a question of law, which we review de novo.

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

Goldberg v. Michael · filed 2002-03-21

Regardless of whether the complaint is dismissed under section 2 — 615 or section 2 — 619, we apply a de novo standard of review.

A dismissal under section 2-615 receives de novo review on appeal.

Continental Casualty Co. v. American National Bank & Trust Co. · filed 2002-03-29

Where a trial court dismisses a complaint under either section 2 — 615 or section 2 — 619 of the Code (735. ILCS 5/2—615, 2—619 (West 1998)), this court applies a de nova standard of review.

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

Weidner v. Midcon Corp. · filed 2002-04-11

The issue is one of law, and our review of a dismissal pursuant to section 2 — 615 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/2 — 615 (West 1996)) is de novo.

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

Weidner v. Midcon Corp. Filed as Rule 23 Order on Mar. 5, 2002 Motion to publish granted Apr. 11, 2002 · filed 2002-04-11

The issue is one of law, and our review of a dismissal pursuant to section 2-615 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 1996)) is de novo .

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

Beahringer v. Roberts · filed 2002-05-21

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

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

SEARS, ROEBUCK AND CO v. National Union · filed 2002-05-22

Where a trial court dismisses a complaint under either section 2 — 615 or section 2 — 619 of the Code (735 ILCS 5/2 — 615, 2 — 619 (West 1998)), this court applies a de novo standard of review.

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

Harris v. Eckersall · filed 2002-06-07

Our review of a trial court’s grant of a motion to dismiss, under section 2 — 615 of the Code of Civil Procedure, is de novo.

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

Ramos v. City of Peru · filed 2002-08-08

This court applies a de novo standard when reviewing a lower court’s dismissal of claims pursuant to sections 2 — 615 and 2 — 619 of the Code.

A dismissal under section 2-615 is reviewed de novo, with well-pleaded facts accepted as true and reasonable inferences drawn for the nonmoving party.

Balmoral Racing Club, Inc. v. Gonzales · filed 2003-03-31

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. Hanna v. City of Chicago, 331 Ill. App. 3d 295, 303, 771 N.E.2d 13, 19 (2002).

A judgment on the pleadings under subsection (e) is reviewed de novo.

Scottsdale Insurance Co. v. Robertson · filed 2003-03-31(e)

We note first that the entry of judgment on the pleadings is reviewed de novo .

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

Tuite v. Corbitt · filed 2005-06-07

The applicable standard of review for a section 2-615 motion is de novo.

A section 2 — 615 dismissal is reviewed de novo, with well-pleaded facts accepted as true and reasonable inferences drawn for the nonmoving party.

Evitts v. DaimlerChrysler Motors Corp. · filed 2005-08-11

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

A court reviews the dismissal of a mandamus complaint under section 2-615 de novo.

Jamison v. City of Zion · filed 2005-08-12

We review de novo the granting of a section 2-615 motion to dismiss a complaint for mandamus.

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

Martusciello v. JDS Homes, Inc. · filed 2005-09-26

We begin by addressing plaintiffs’ challenge to the trial court’s dismissal of count I against Kramer under section 2 — 615 of the Code. Our review is de novo.

A section 2-615 dismissal is reviewed de novo by asking whether the complaint’s allegations, read in the plaintiff’s favor, sufficiently state a cause of action.

Kutcher v. Barry Realty, Inc. · filed 2005-11-29

When we review a section 2 — 615 dismissal, we apply de novo review (Board of Directors of Bloomfield Club Recreation Ass ’n v. Hoffman Group, Inc., 186 Ill. 2d 419, 424 (1999)) and 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 (Bryson v. News America Publications, Inc., 174 Ill. 2d 77, 86-87 (1996)).

A circuit court’s decision granting a motion to dismiss under section 2-615 is reviewed de novo.

Nestle USA, Inc. v. Dunlap · filed 2006-06-01

We review a circuit court’s decision to grant motions to dismiss under sections 2 — 615 and 2 — 619 of the Code (735 ILCS 5/2 — 615, 2 — 619 (West 2004)) under the de novo standard.

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

Kindernay v. Hillsboro Area Hospital · filed 2006-06-15

We review de novo the circuit court’s ruling on a section 2 — 615 motion to dismiss.

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

Lombard Historical Commission v. Village of Lombard · filed 2006-07-14

However, where a petition is dismissed under section 2 — 615 or section 2 — 619 of the Civil Practice Law (735 ILCS 5/2 — 615, 2 — 619 (West 2004)), review is de novo.

Dismissal of a complaint under section 2-615 is reviewed de novo.

Robinson v. Seidman · filed 2006-08-24

We review the trial court=s dismissal of a complaint de novo.

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

Johnson v. Illinois Dept. of Corrections · filed 2006-09-28

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

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

Maag v. Illinois Coalition for Jobs · filed 2006-11-02

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

An appeal from a dismissal under section 2-615 is reviewed de novo.

Burns v. Masterbrand Cabinets, Inc. · filed 2007-01-09

We review de novo an appeal from a motion to dismiss pursuant to section 2 — 615 of the Code of Civil Procedure.