735 ILCS 5/2-621
2021 Illinois Compiled Statutes|Chapter 735 - CIVIL PROCEDURE|735 ILCS 5/ - Code of Civil Procedure.|Article II - Civil Practice

 (from Ch. 110, par. 2-621)(Text of Section WITH the changes made by P.A. 89-7, which has been held  unconstitutional)Sec. 2-621.     Product liability actions.(a) In any product liability  action based on any theory or doctrine commenced or maintained against a  defendant or defendants other than  the manufacturer, that party shall upon answering or otherwise pleading  file an affidavit certifying the correct identity of the manufacturer of  the product allegedly causing injury, death or damage.  The commencement  of a product liability action based on any theory or doctrine against such  defendant or defendants shall toll  the applicable statute of limitation and statute of repose relative to the  defendant or defendants for purposes of asserting a strict liability in  tort cause of action.(b) Once the plaintiff has filed a complaint against the manufacturer  or manufacturers, and the manufacturer or manufacturers have or are required  to have answered or otherwise pleaded, the court shall order the dismissal  of a product liability action based on any theory or doctrine against the  certifying defendant or  defendants, provided the certifying defendant or defendants are not within  the categories set forth in subsection (c) of this Section.  Due diligence  shall be exercised by the certifying defendant or defendants in providing  the plaintiff with the correct identity of the manufacturer or manufacturers,  and due diligence shall be exercised by the plaintiff in filing an action  and obtaining jurisdiction over the manufacturer or manufacturers.The plaintiff may at any time subsequent to the dismissal move to vacate  the order of dismissal and reinstate the certifying defendant or defendants,  provided plaintiff can show one or more of the following:(1) That the applicable period of statute of     limitation or statute of repose bars the assertion of a cause of action against the manufacturer or manufacturers of the product allegedly causing the injury, death or damage; or(2) That the identity of the manufacturer given to     the plaintiff by the certifying defendant or defendants was incorrect.  Once the correct identity of the manufacturer has been given by the certifying defendant or defendants the court shall again dismiss the certifying defendant or defendants; or(3) That the manufacturer no longer exists, cannot be     subject to the jurisdiction of the courts of this State, or, despite due diligence, the manufacturer is not amenable to service of process; or(4) That the manufacturer is unable to satisfy any     judgment as determined by the court; or(5) That the court determines that the manufacturer     would be unable to satisfy a reasonable settlement or other agreement with plaintiff.(c) A court shall not enter a dismissal order relative to any certifying  defendant or defendants other than the manufacturer even though full compliance  with subsection (a) of this Section has been made where the plaintiff can  show one or more of the following:(1) That the defendant has exercised some significant     control over the design or manufacture of the product, or has provided instructions or warnings to the manufacturer relative to the alleged defect in the product which caused the injury, death or damage; or(2) That the defendant had actual knowledge of the     defect in the product which caused the injury, death or damage; or(3) That the defendant created the defect in the     product which caused the injury, death or damage.(d) Nothing contained in this Section shall be construed to grant a cause  of action on any legal theory  or doctrine, or to affect  the right of any person to seek and obtain indemnity or contribution.(e) This Section applies to all causes of action accruing on or after  September 24, 1979.    (Source: P.A. 89-7, eff. 3-9-95.)(Text of Section WITHOUT the changes made by P.A. 89-7, which has been held  unconstitutional)Sec. 2-621.     Product liability actions.(a) In any product liability action based in whole or in part on the  doctrine of strict liability in  tort commenced or maintained against a defendant or defendants other than  the manufacturer, that party shall upon answering or otherwise pleading  file an affidavit certifying the correct identity of the manufacturer of  the product allegedly causing injury, death or damage.  The commencement  of a product liability action based in whole or  in part on the doctrine  of strict liability in tort against such defendant or defendants shall toll  the applicable statute of limitation and statute of repose relative to the  defendant or defendants for purposes of asserting a strict liability in  tort cause of action.(b) Once the plaintiff has filed a complaint against the manufacturer  or manufacturers, and the manufacturer or manufacturers have or are required  to have answered or otherwise pleaded, the court shall order the dismissal  of a strict  liability in tort claim against the certifying defendant or  defendants, provided the certifying defendant or defendants are not within  the categories set forth in subsection (c) of this Section.  Due diligence  shall be exercised by the certifying defendant or defendants in providing  the plaintiff with the correct identity of the manufacturer or manufacturers,  and due diligence shall be exercised by the plaintiff in filing an action  and obtaining jurisdiction over the manufacturer or manufacturers.The plaintiff may at any time subsequent to the dismissal move to vacate  the order of dismissal and reinstate the certifying defendant or defendants,  provided plaintiff can show one or more of the following:(1) That the applicable period of statute of limitation or statute of  repose bars the assertion of a strict liability in tort cause of action  against the manufacturer or manufacturers of the product allegedly causing  the injury, death or damage; or(2) That the identity of the manufacturer given to the plaintiff by the  certifying defendant or defendants was incorrect.  Once the correct identity  of the manufacturer has been given by the certifying defendant or defendants  the court shall again dismiss the certifying defendant or defendants; or(3) That the manufacturer no longer exists, cannot be subject to the  jurisdiction  of the courts of this State, or, despite due diligence, the manufacturer  is not amenable to service of process; or(4) That the manufacturer is unable to satisfy any judgment as determined  by the court; or(5) That the court determines that the manufacturer would be unable to  satisfy a reasonable settlement or other agreement with plaintiff.(c) A court shall not enter a dismissal order relative to any certifying  defendant or defendants other than the manufacturer even though full compliance  with subsection (a) of this Section has been made where the plaintiff can  show one or more of the following:(1) That the defendant has exercised some significant control over the  design or manufacture of the product, or has provided instructions or warnings  to the manufacturer relative to the alleged defect in the product which  caused the injury, death or damage; or(2) That the defendant had actual knowledge of the defect in the product  which caused the injury, death or damage; or(3) That the defendant created the defect in the product which caused  the injury, death or damage.(d) Nothing contained in this Section shall be construed to grant a cause  of action in strict liability in tort or any other legal theory, or to affect  the right of any person to seek and obtain indemnity or contribution.(e) This Section applies to all causes of action accruing on or after  September 24, 1979.    (Source: P.A. 84-1043.)