# Illinois 2-622 Affidavit Record Review > Page-cited record review for Illinois 735 ILCS 5/2-622 affidavits — one written report per defendant, from a file read in full, at a flat 10¢ a page. Canonical page: https://medrecords.ai/solutions/illinois-certificate-of-merit/ --- NewWe now read the actual MRI and CT imaging — not just the radiologist's 1-page report. [See how →](https://medrecords.ai/product/imaging/) [Home](https://medrecords.ai/) ›[Solutions](https://medrecords.ai/solutions/) › — Illinois 2-622 Affidavit ILLINOIS CERTIFICATE OF MERIT RECORD REVIEW ## One written report. Per defendant. From the same 3,000 pages. Illinois certificate of merit record review services prepare the page-cited record a reviewing health professional reads before writing the report 735 ILCS 5/2-622 requires. Every encounter and finding is indexed to its source page, and the review is organised by defendant, because the statute requires a separate written report for each one. [Test a file ](https://medrecords.ai/test-a-file/?src=illinois-certificate-of-merit) [Book a demo](https://medrecords.ai/demo/) Click any row → the source page it cites Record review · Case #IME-4812 documented Adams, Timothy · pre-filing record set 342 pp / 2 packets received logged 11 duplicate pages removed free p.140 — wrong patient quarantined Pages 342 Documents 27 Cited 100% ### Section 2-622 is a screening device. The legislature said so. We do not build for a case type until we can name the standard that defines a correct output and the person who grades the file against it. In merit screening, both are written into the rule itself. The standard and the referee The rulebook - 735 ILCS 5/2-622(a)(1), which requires the attorney's affidavit that a qualifying health professional has been consulted, together with that professional's written report - 735 ILCS 5/2-622, which requires a separate written report as to each defendant named in the action - 735 ILCS 5/2-622(a)(1), which requires the reviewing professional to be knowledgeable in the relevant issues and to have practised or taught in the same area of medicine within the last six years - 735 ILCS 5/8-2501, the expert witness standards the reviewing professional has to meet The referee - The trial court on a motion to dismiss under 735 ILCS 5/2-619, the route by which a non-compliant affidavit and report are attacked - The Illinois appellate courts, which have extended the requirement beyond conventionally pleaded negligence claims - The reviewing health professional, whose written report has to state that there is a meritorious and reasonable cause for filing Reviewer hours multiplied by every defendant the complaint names Flat 10¢/page here, duplicates free Record review · Case #IME-4812 cited 100% Packet — 342 pp / 2 packets · 11 deduplicated — logged Chronology by defendant — Encounters mapped to each provider — cited Findings and imaging — Each result at its source page — cited Records referenced, not produced — Named in the chart, absent from the file — flagged Review delivered · cited 100% · no meritorious-cause opinion offered How it works ### 3 steps between the records and the report. 01 #### Send the record set Hospital charts, office notes, imaging and operative reports, nursing records and billing, in any format. 02 #### We return the review, page-cited and split by defendant The chronology, findings and course of treatment, each line citing the page it came from, organised so each named defendant's involvement can be read on its own. 03 #### Your health professional writes the reports Whether there is a meritorious and reasonable cause for filing is the reviewing professional's conclusion, in the reviewing professional's own written report, one for each defendant. The boundary, in writing ### A record review, never a meritorious-cause report. We index and cite what the record documents. We do not assess the standard of care, conclude that a meritorious and reasonable cause exists, or write the health professional's report under 735 ILCS 5/2-622. That report is the reviewing professional's, and the affidavit is counsel's. The statute requires a separate written report for each defendant, so a hospital and a treating physician need two. The review is split by defendant from the start, which is why the second report costs reading time rather than a second read. Audit trail · Case #IME-4812 exportable 08:12 — Packet received · 342 pp / 2 packets — system 08:31 — 11 pages deduplicated — system 08:44 — p.140 flagged — wrong patient — system 08:54 — Record review complete · review complete · chronology cited · cited 100% — system 09:20 — Record review reviewed · citations verified — reviewer 09:26 — Record review exported · affidavit and reports filed off-platform — reviewer Every access logged · file deleted 30 days after delivery Why Medrecords AI ### The rules the platform never breaks. EVERY LINE CITED CASE #IME-4812 · ADAMS, T. 342 pp 2/14 — ER visit, right knee p.4 4/18 — arthroscopic surgery p.61 p.140 — wrong patient quarantined Medrecords AI Read every page · cite every line #### HIPAA, under a signed BAA Every file is handled under our Business Associate Agreement, from the first byte. #### Never trains a model Your records are never used to train any AI model — ours or anyone else's. #### Every line cited If we can't cite it, we don't say it. Every sentence links to its source page. #### Deleted after delivery Files are deleted 30 days after delivery, with a full audit log of every access. Powered by the platform ### 4 capabilities behind every record review. The record review is one deliverable of the same platform that reads, sorts, and cites the whole record. [ #### Medical Records OCR Every page read in full — hospital charts, office notes, nursing flowsheets, handwritten records — nothing skipped, nothing guessed. IN ACTION · 342 pp / 2 packets → 27 documents, read in full ](https://medrecords.ai/product/ocr/) [ #### Medical Chronology The course of care builds itself into one timeline, then splits cleanly by the provider who delivered each encounter. IN ACTION · first presentation → current treatment, one continuous timeline ](https://medrecords.ai/product/chronology/) [ #### Verifiable AI Citations If we can't cite it, we don't say it. Every line of the review links to the page range behind it. IN ACTION · review → cited 100% ](https://medrecords.ai/product/citations/) [ #### Medical Summary Reports The review formats straight into the reviewer's working file — your template, your letterhead. IN ACTION · record review → report-ready ](https://medrecords.ai/product/summaries/) FAQ ### Illinois 2-622 affidavits, answered. No. Section 2-622 requires a written report from the health professional the attorney consulted, stating that there is a meritorious and reasonable cause for the filing. That conclusion is theirs. We prepare the page-cited record review they read before reaching it. Because the statute requires a separate written report as to each defendant named. If a hospital and a treating physician are both named, that is two reports, and the reviewing professional needs each defendant's involvement legible on its own. Section 2-622(a)(1) requires someone knowledgeable in the relevant issues who has practised or taught in the same area of medicine within the last six years and meets the expert standards in 735 ILCS 5/8-2501. Qualification is a legal question for counsel, not something we assess. No. Medrecords AI does not retrieve records from providers or facilities. You bring the records you already have — review starts in minutes from upload. Retrieval vendors take days; you can keep yours and still cut the review to minutes. By a motion to dismiss under 735 ILCS 5/2-619. The screening purpose the legislature gave the section is why courts examine the report itself rather than treating the affidavit as a formality. ### Send one file. We'll tell you what we can read. No obligation. If the case type is buildable we'll scope it; if it isn't, we'll say so. [Test a file ](https://medrecords.ai/test-a-file/?src=illinois-certificate-of-merit) [Book a demo](https://medrecords.ai/demo/) [See every case type we process →](https://medrecords.ai/solutions/case-types/)