Sadie Embser, a HeplerBroom summer associate and third-year law student at University of Illinois Chicago School of Law, provided invaluable assistance in drafting this article.
In May 2025, the Illinois Supreme Court amended Supreme Court Rule 9. The amendment details the steps a filing party must take if their document is rejected and that rejection would make the filing untimely. The amendment took effect immediately.
The Old Rule
Prior to this amendment, Rule 9(d) allowed a filing party to seek relief from a document being deemed untimely or rejected only “upon good cause shown.” Fourth District Appellate Justice Eugene G. Doherty, chair of the Supreme Court e-Business Policy Advisory Board, noted that only about 5% of filings are rejected. However, when the rejected filing is time sensitive, substantive rights may be affected.
Given the discretionary nature of the “good cause shown” standard and the adverse impact rejected filings can have, this new amendment gives the filing party a more straightforward path for seeking relief. Vision Point of Sale, Inc. v. Haas, 226 Ill. 2d 334, 353 (2007) (noting that the circuit court has “sound discretion” in determining whether good cause has been shown, and that the determination is fact-dependent).
The New Rule
Rule 9(d) now requires trial courts to backdate the later-filed document to its original submission date if the filing party files a motion within five court days of the notice of rejection.
This motion must include:
(1) date of the original submission
(2) date of the rejection
(3) reason for the rejection
(4) an attached exhibit of the document to be deemed filed on the date of the failed submission (with only corrections that address the error allowed).
These explicit steps give the filing party more certainty and minimize reliance on a judge’s discretion about what constitutes a “good cause.” This increased certainty can thus offer practitioners some peace of mind when navigating e-filing within the various court systems and e-filing portals across Illinois.
PartnerStephanie W. Weiner defends personal injury cases. These are primarily in construction, premises, municipal and §1983 claims, and contractual matters, including risk transfer.
She also defends school districts and school bus ...
