Scholler v. Scholler’s Empirical Analysis
1984
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 4 district · 159 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 184 later decisions — most recently March 2026 · most notably State v. Bey (1999), Flaherty v. Weinberg (1985)
6 federal appellate · 4 district · 159 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Savings Bank v. Ward · Goodson v. McDonough Power Equipment, Inc. · 92 Ill. 2d 13 - Pelham v. Griesheimer · Whitehead v. General Telephone Co. · Coulson v. Coulson
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 184 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““An attorney is immune from liability to third persons arising from his performance as an attorney in good faith on behalf of, and with the knowledge of his client, unless such third person is in privity with the client or the attorney acts maliciously.” (Emphasis added.)”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage“A point of law or a fact which was actually and directly in issue in the former action, and was there passed upon and determined by a court of competent jurisdiction, may not be drawn in question in a subsequent action between the same parties or their privies. The prior judgment estops a party, or a person in privity with him, from subsequently relitigating the identical issue raised in the prior action. * * *”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage““Furthermore, Alyce Scholler’s reliance on Coulson, supra, is tenuous. In Coulson, supra, at page 15, we acknowledged that ‘ “* * * [a]ny fraud connected with the presentation of a case to a court is a fraud upon the court, in a broad sense.” ’ However, in Coulson this court more narrowly defined ‘fraud upon the court’ as the situation ‘[wjhere an officer of the court, e.g., an attorney * * * actively participates in defrauding the court * * *. ’ Id. at 15 . In the case at bar, Alyce Scholler’s complaint makes no allegations of fraud committed by any officer of the court. The allegations in the complaint are solely directed to a claim of fraud committed by Michael Scholler. That being the case, Coulson, supra, has no application to the instant cause and reliance thereon offers no support to Alyce Scholler’s argument.” (Emphasis added.)”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.