13-217.Reversal or dismissal.

This savings statute keeps a plaintiff from losing a claim entirely because of a procedural setback rather than a loss on the merits. If a judgment for the plaintiff is reversed on appeal, or a plaintiff's verdict is overturned on a motion in arrest of judgment, or a federal district court dismisses the case for lack of jurisdiction or improper venue, the plaintiff — or his or her heirs, executors, or administrators — may commence a new action within one year, or within the remaining limitations period, whichever is greater, after that judgment is reversed, entered against the plaintiff, or the case is dismissed. This works even if the original limitations deadline expired while the first action was pending.

Illinois prints two versions of this section because Public Act 89-7 — the 1995 tort-reform act — was later struck down as unconstitutional. The version enacted by that act narrows the refiling right: it states that no action voluntarily dismissed by the plaintiff, or dismissed for want of prosecution, may be refiled once the original time for commencing the action has already expired. The version predating that act instead lists voluntary dismissal and want-of-prosecution dismissal as grounds that qualify for the same one-year, or remaining-period, refiling right as a reversal.

Because Public Act 89-7 was held unconstitutional, the pre-89-7 version — the one that includes voluntary dismissal and want-of-prosecution dismissal among the qualifying grounds for refiling — is the version currently in force.