2-105.Defendants in different counties - Review.
Article II. Civil Practice · Part 1. Venue · Not amended since adoption on record · Last verified July 20, 2026
Full Text of 735 ILCS 5/2-105
Plain-English Summary
This section addresses appellate review of a specific kind of venue ruling: an overruled motion to transfer in an action involving defendants residing in different counties, where venue rests on residence. If the moving defendant, who does not reside in the county, proceeds to trial on the merits after losing that motion, the overruling of the motion is not, by itself, grounds for reversal.
To preserve the issue for appeal, the defendant has to renew the motion at the close of all the evidence. Even then, reversal requires the record or the evidence to show that the resident defendant was joined without probable cause and not in good faith, solely to fix venue in that county rather than to obtain a real judgment against them.
Frequently Asked Questions
When does this section come into play?
In an action involving defendants residing in different counties, where venue is based on residence and a timely motion to transfer is made by a defendant who does not reside in that county.
Is an overruled transfer motion automatically grounds for reversal?
No. If the defendant proceeds to trial on the merits, overruling the motion is not ground for reversal unless the defendant renews it at the close of all the evidence.
What must the record show for reversal to be available?
That the defendant residing within the county was joined without probable cause and not in good faith, solely to fix venue in that county.
What must a nonresident defendant do to preserve this issue after trial begins?
Renew the motion to transfer at the close of all the evidence.
Does this section apply to a case with only one defendant?
By its terms, it applies to an action "involving defendants residing in different counties," so it addresses multi-county, multi-defendant cases.
Amendment History
(Source: P.A. 82-280.)