Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 103 Ill. App. 2d 23 - Moseid v. McDonough

103 Ill. App. 2d 23 - Moseid v. McDonough’s Empirical Analysis

1968

Citation profile

29
cited by 29 later decisions
1
states following
September 1978
most recently cited

29 state decisions

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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““[T]he test to be applied is the existence of a community of interest in the subject matter and a community of interest in the remedy among all who make up the purported class. Cohon v. Oscar L. Paris Co., 17 Ill App2d 21, 149 NE2d 472 ; Johnson v. Halpin, 413 Ill 257, 108 NE.2d 429; Harrison Sheet Steel Co. v. Lyons, 15 Ill2d 532, 155 NE2d 595 ; Smyth v. Kaspar American State Bank, 9 Ill2d 27, 136 NE2d 796 ; Flanagan v. City of Chicago, 311 Ill App 135, 160, 35 NE2d 545 . Factors to be considered in applying this test are: whether the claims of all members of the class share a common question of law and fact, such as the existence of a common fund from which relief can be given (Kimbrough v. Parker, 344 Ill App 483, 486, 101 NE2d 617 ; Flanagan v. City of Chicago, 311 Ill App 135, 160, 35 NE2d 545 ); whether the causes of action of the members of the class arise from the same transaction (Peoples Store of Roseland v. McKibbin, 379 Ill 148, 154, 39 NE2d 995 ; Material Service Corp. v. McKibbin, 380 Ill 226, 236, 43 NE2d 939 ); whether one party can adequately represent the rights and interests of all other members of the purported class (Newberry Library v. Board of Education, 387 Ill 85, 90, 55 NE2d 147 ); whether the number of possible class members renders separate litigation impossible or impractical (South East Nat. Bank of Chicago v. Board of Education, 298 Ill App 92, 114, 18 NE2d 584 ); and whether there exists a purely equitable cause of action (Fetherston v. Nationa”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.