104 Ill. 2d 150 - In Re Teichner’s Empirical Analysis
1984
Citation profile
11 federal appellate · 24 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 39 later decisions — most recently January 2022 · most notably 132 Ill. 2d 507 - In Re Gerard (1989), 177 W. Va. 356 - Committee on Legal Ethics of West Virginia State Bar v. Tatterson (1986)
11 federal appellate · 24 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 Walter v. United States · 44 Ill. 2d 105 - Weiland Tool & Manufacturing Co. v. Whitney · Cedar Park Cemetery Ass'n v. Village of Calumet Park · 30 Ill. 2d 73 - Pocius v. Halvorsen · 6 Wis. 2d 498 - Tonn v. Reuter
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 39 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Given the fact that the unquestioned, routine payment here does not come within the normal definitions of a settlement, and did not result from a judgment, and that ambiguities are to be construed against the drafter [citations], we cannot disagree with the panel’s finding that the terms of the [contingent fee] contract do not entitle respondent to a fee.” (Emphasis added.) In re Teichner, 104 Ill. 2d at 160 , 470 N.E.2d at 977 .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““(1) the time and labor required, the novelty and difficulty of the questions involved, and the skill requisite to perform the legal service properly; (2) the likelihood that the acceptance of the particular employment would preclude other employment by the lawyer; (3) the fee customarily charged in the locality for similar legal services; (4) the amount involved and the results obtained; (5) the time limitations imposed by the client or by the circumstances; (6) the nature and length of the professional relationship with the client; (7) the experience, reputation, and ability of the lawyer or lawyers performing the services; and (8) whether the fee is fixed or contingent.” 87 Ill. 2d Rules 2 — 106(b)(1) through (b)(8).”
1 later decision 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.