19-122.Seeking wrong remedy not fatal.
Article XIX. Replevin · Not amended since adoption on record · Last verified July 20, 2026
Full Text of 735 ILCS 5/19-122
Plain-English Summary
Section 19-122 keeps a technical pleading mismatch from defeating a plaintiff who has otherwise proven a case. If the court, on a motion directed to the pleadings, a summary judgment motion, or at trial, finds that the plaintiff pleaded or established facts entitling the plaintiff to relief, but that the plaintiff asked for the wrong remedy, the court must permit an amendment rather than deny relief outright.
The amendment must be allowed on just and reasonable terms, and once made, the court grants the relief the plaintiff is entitled to on the amended pleadings or the evidence presented. This forgives a plaintiff who correctly identified the wrong but asked the court for the wrong form of relief under Article XIX.
In deciding what is just and reasonable, the court weighs the defendant's countervailing interests: the right to assert additional defenses, to demand a jury trial, to plead a counterclaim or third-party complaint, and to require the plaintiff to take steps that were not needed under the pleadings as they stood before amendment. That balancing protects the defendant from being blindsided by a late change in the theory of relief.
Frequently Asked Questions
What happens if a replevin plaintiff sought the wrong remedy?
If the court finds the plaintiff proved facts entitling the plaintiff to relief but asked for the wrong remedy, the court must allow the pleadings to be amended on just and reasonable terms and then grant the relief the plaintiff is entitled to.
At what stage can this amendment happen?
On a motion directed to the pleadings, on a motion for summary judgment, or at trial.
What must the court consider in deciding whether an amendment is just and reasonable?
The defendant's right to assert additional defenses, demand a jury trial, plead a counterclaim or third-party complaint, and require the plaintiff to take additional steps not required under the prior pleadings.
Does this section create a new cause of action for the plaintiff?
No. It only allows correction of the remedy sought when the plaintiff has already pleaded or proven the underlying facts entitling the plaintiff to relief under Article XIX.
Why does the statute protect the defendant when the amendment is allowed?
Because switching remedies late in the case could otherwise deprive the defendant of defenses, a jury trial, or other procedural rights the defendant would have had if the correct remedy had been pleaded from the start.
Amendment History
(Source: P.A. 82-280.)