Construction Claim Rules in Illinois

Statutory interest rate

9% / year general postjudgment (varies by claim/debtor type)

9% is the default postjudgment rate; 6% against a government entity; 5% for consumer debt ≤$25,000. Prejudgment interest of 6% applies only to personal injury/wrongful death; contract-claim prejudgment interest runs under a separate statute (Interest Act, 815 ILCS 205/2, generally 5%) not fully confirmed this pass.

Compounding: Not confirmed this pass

Citation: 735 ILCS 5/2-1303; 815 ILCS 205/2 (contract prejudgment, unconfirmed)

Source: https://codes.findlaw.com/il/chapter-735-civil-procedure/il-st-sect-735-5-2-1303/

Illinois has multiple different rates depending on claim type and phase; confirm which one actually applies to your claim before using any single number.

Accrual: breach of contract claim

From when the money becomes due under the written instrument, generally the breach date

The Interest Act (815 ILCS 205/2) allows interest on money due on an instrument in writing from the time it becomes due, which for a construction contract is generally the date payment was owed or the date of breach.

Citation: 815 ILCS 205/2

Source: https://law.justia.com/codes/illinois/chapter-815/act-815-ilcs-205/

The Justia link goes to the full Interest Act chapter; Justia doesn't host section 205/2 on its own page. Confirm the section 2 text there or at ilga.gov before relying on it.

Accrual: property damage / tort claim

Notable gap: Illinois's main prejudgment-interest statute doesn't reach property damage at all

A 2021 amendment to 735 ILCS 5/2-1303 added a 6% prejudgment interest right running from when the action was filed, but by its own terms that right is limited to personal injury and wrongful death actions. It does not extend to property damage claims. A property-damage claimant would instead have to rely on the general Interest Act (815 ILCS 205/2, same as the contract entry above) if the claim can be framed as money due on an account or written instrument, or go without statutory prejudgment interest.

Citation: 735 ILCS 5/2-1303 (as amended 2021)

Source: https://codes.findlaw.com/il/chapter-735-civil-procedure/il-st-sect-735-5-2-1303/

This is a genuinely counterintuitive result worth confirming with counsel: don't assume Illinois property-damage claims automatically carry the same prejudgment interest right that personal injury claims now do.

Actual Cash Value rule

Replacement cost minus depreciation (statutory), labor cannot be depreciated

Illinois Supreme Court held insurers may not depreciate labor costs absent policy language expressly permitting it.

Citation: Sproull v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 2021 IL 126446

Source: https://law.justia.com/cases/illinois/supreme-court/2021/126446.html

Exact statutory citation for the base 'replacement cost minus depreciation' definition not independently confirmed this pass. The link above was upgraded in a follow-up pass to the free, full opinion text on Justia; it previously pointed to a law firm's summary article.

ACV statute or regulation

No Illinois insurance-code statute or regulation bans labor depreciation, but the Illinois Supreme Court has held that labor cannot be depreciated when the policy leaves ACV and depreciation undefined, effectively producing a strong statewide rule.

Illinois has not enacted an insurance-code statute or Department of Insurance regulation that expressly restricts depreciating labor. Instead the rule comes from the Illinois Supreme Court's decision in Sproull v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co., 2021 IL 126446 (Ill. 2021), which held that where a policy leaves both 'actual cash value' and 'depreciation' undefined, the insurer may not depreciate the intangible labor component of a repair estimate when calculating ACV. This is case law rather than a statute, but because it is a controlling state supreme court decision it functions in practice like a statewide rule for undefined-term policies. The Illinois Administrative Code's unfair claims practices rule (50 Ill. Adm. Code 919) was checked and does not itself define ACV or address labor depreciation.

Citation: Sproull v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 2021 IL 126446; 50 Ill. Adm. Code 919 (reviewed, no ACV/labor provision found)

Source: https://ilcourtsaudio.blob.core.windows.net/antilles-resources/resources/29b130f8-9250-4945-ac16-22f8b6813c79/126446_AMB2.pdf

This is a case-law rule, not a statute or adopted regulation, so it sits at the edge of what this field is meant to capture. Flagging it because it functions as a de facto statewide restriction on labor depreciation and the site's users would likely want to know about it, but it should probably be labeled as case law rather than as a codified statute if the distinction matters for how it is displayed.

Recoverable depreciation holdback

No Illinois statute or regulation was found setting a specific deadline or procedure for paying withheld recoverable depreciation. A related but distinct rule: Illinois is grouped among states that preclude depreciating labor costs in ACV calculations.

The Illinois Department of Insurance's consumer guidance confirms depreciation holdbacks are common practice and that policies 'usually' set a time limit, but this appears to be a policy term rather than a statutory requirement -- no specific Illinois statute setting a holdback release deadline was located. Separately, industry legal sources identify Illinois as one of roughly 15 states that, by case law, statute, or regulatory order, preclude insurers from depreciating labor when calculating ACV under a replacement-cost methodology, unless the policy expressly states labor is to be depreciated.

Source: https://idoi.illinois.gov/content/dam/soi/en/web/insurance/consumers/documents/claim-disaster-guide-7-23-2019.pdf

RESEARCHED from scratch (prior entry was blank). Same pattern as New York: no state-specific holdback-timing statute found. The labor-depreciation prohibition is a related but distinct regulatory fact, not independently verified against a primary Illinois source in this pass -- flagged for confirmation if that specific issue becomes relevant.

“No damages for delay” clause enforceability

Enforceable but construed strictly, with two recognized exceptions

The Illinois Supreme Court held that a no-damages-for-delay clause is enforced, but is construed strictly against the party seeking its protection. It recognized two exceptions grounded in ordinary contract principles: delay caused by the other party's bad faith, fraud, concealment, or misrepresentation (rooted in the implied duty of good faith and fair dealing); and delay not within the parties' reasonable contemplation when they contracted, using reasonable foreseeability as the touchstone.

Citation: J & B Steel Contractors, Inc. v. C. Iber & Sons, Inc., 162 Ill. 2d 265 (1994)

Source: https://law.justia.com/cases/illinois/supreme-court/1994/76070-7.html

Construction contract filing deadline

10 years for a written contract claim

Illinois sets a 10-year limitations period for actions on written contracts and similar written instruments, which covers an ordinary written construction-contract claim; this is notably longer than most states in this batch.

Citation: 735 ILCS 5/13-206

Source: https://law.justia.com/codes/illinois/chapter-735/act-735-ilcs-5/article-xiii/

A separate, shorter statute of repose applies specifically to construction-related tort/defect claims rather than an ordinary payment dispute; that repose period wasn't independently researched this pass.

State unemployment insurance (SUTA)

Illinois's new-employer unemployment tax rate is 3.35% of the first $14,250 in wages per employee for 2026.

Most new employers pay 3.35% for 2026, while new employers in administrative support and waste management (NAICS sector 56) pay a higher 3.45%; both figures already include the state's 0.55% fund-building surtax. Established, experience-rated employers pay anywhere from about 0.75% to 7.05%, also inclusive of the surtax. The taxable wage base increased to $14,250 per employee for 2026.

Citation: Illinois Department of Employment Security (IDES)

Source: https://ides.illinois.gov/content/dam/soi/en/web/ides/ides_forms_and_publications/EA-50_2026.pdf

Last checked: 2026-08-26

Every figure here (3.35% entry rate, 3.45% for NAICS sector 56, 0.75%-7.05% experience range, $14,250 wage base) is now confirmed directly against IDES's own official EA-50 (2026) publication, not a secondary summary. Worth flagging: multiple independent secondary payroll-guide sites returned different, inconsistent, and incorrect figures for Illinois during this search (one cited a $13,590 wage base and 3.95% rate, another $13,271 and 3.175%) -- none of which match the actual IDES document. Illinois is a clear example of why this project checks primary sources rather than trusting SEO-optimized secondary payroll sites.

Workers' compensation rating

Illinois uses NCCI advisory rates rather than its own rating bureau.

Illinois relies on NCCI to develop workers' compensation loss costs and classification codes, filed with the Illinois Department of Insurance for approval. Carriers then apply their own loss-cost multipliers on top of the approved NCCI figures, the standard advisory-rate model used across most states.

Citation: NCCI Illinois State Advisory Forum, Illinois Department of Insurance

Source: https://www.ncci.com/Articles/Documents/II_StateAdvisoryForumState_IL_2025.pdf

Prevailing wage law

Illinois requires prevailing wages on essentially all public works contracts, with no minimum dollar threshold.

The Illinois Prevailing Wage Act requires contractors and subcontractors to pay locally prevailing wages to laborers, workers and mechanics employed on public works projects funded in whole or in part by public funds. Unlike many other states, Illinois does not set a minimum contract dollar amount below which the law does not apply, coverage instead turns on whether the work qualifies as a public works project. The Illinois Department of Labor publishes county-by-county prevailing wage rate schedules and administers compliance.

Citation: Illinois Prevailing Wage Act, 820 ILCS 130/0.01-12

Source: https://labor.illinois.gov/laws-rules/conmed/prevailing-wage-act.html

OSHA plan

Public-sector-only state plan; private construction sites remain under federal OSHA

Illinois operates an OSHA-approved state plan covering only public-sector employees. Private construction sites remain under federal OSHA.

Citation: 29 U.S.C. § 667; Illinois public-employee safety plan

Source: https://www.osha.gov/stateplans/il

Weight of an OSHA violation in a negligence case

Evidence, not negligence per se: explicitly distinguished from other states in Illinois case law

Illinois courts have explicitly held an OSHA violation does not automatically prove negligence; noting it is not treated as negligence per se in Illinois 'like it is in some states'; but allow OSHA citations and reports as strong, persuasive evidence. Under general Illinois negligence-per-se doctrine, a statutory violation only rises to full per se status if the legislature intended the statute to impose strict liability; a violation otherwise functions as rebuttable prima facie evidence of negligence.

Citation: Schultz v. Ne. Ill. Reg'l Commuter R.R. Corp., 775 N.E.2d 964, 986 (Ill. 2002).

Source: https://storage.googleapis.com/jnl-bcls-j-bclr-files/journals/1/articles/232/63a30c0a100a2.pdf

RESEARCHED via a comprehensive, exhaustively-footnoted 2020 Boston College Law Review survey of all 50 states + DC on this exact question, cross-checked against the underlying case for accuracy where feasible.

Third-party contribution against the employer

Illinois allows contribution against the employer, but Kotecki v. Cyclops Welding caps it at the employer's own workers' compensation liability absent a waiver: a real, quantified limit, not a bar.

The Construction Contract Indemnification Act and the Contribution Act both matter here alongside retained-control principles (Restatement §414) for whether a GC/owner can be reached directly.

Citation: 820 ILCS 305; 740 ILCS 35, 740 ILCS 100; Kotecki v. Cyclops Welding Corp., 146 Ill.2d 155 (1991).

Source: https://law.justia.com/cases/illinois/supreme-court/1992/68568-7.html

Source: attorney research manual (Construction Injury Law national volumes), self-marked "Draft; verify current law and citator status." Case citations are representative authorities from that manual, not independently re-verified against a citator by ClaimDuke.

Injury-severity gate on contribution claims

Direct suit is barred, but the employer can still be brought in for contribution: capped at the employer's own workers' compensation liability under the Kotecki rule.

820 ILCS 305 generally bars a direct employer negligence suit. Illinois recognizes contribution against the employer, but Kotecki v. Cyclops Welding caps it at the employer's workers' compensation liability absent a waiver.

Citation: 820 ILCS 305; Kotecki v. Cyclops Welding Corp., 146 Ill.2d 155, 585 N.E.2d 1023 (1991).

Source: https://law.justia.com/cases/illinois/supreme-court/1992/68568-7.html

Source: attorney research manual (Construction Injury Law national volumes), self-marked "Draft; verify current law and citator status." Case citations are representative authorities from that manual, not independently re-verified against a citator by ClaimDuke.

Distinctive state doctrine

Illinois's Kotecki cap is a distinctive rule: contribution against the employer is allowed, but judicially capped at the employer's own workers' compensation liability absent a waiver.

Most states either fully bar or fully allow contribution against the employer; Illinois's middle-ground capped-contribution rule, plus its separate Construction Contract Indemnification Act, is a distinctive combination.

Citation: Kotecki v. Cyclops Welding Corp., 146 Ill.2d 155 (1991); 740 ILCS 35.

Source: https://law.justia.com/cases/illinois/supreme-court/1992/68568-7.html

Confirmed real via reuse: same Kotecki citation already verified for graveInjuryGate.