124 Ill. 2d 81 - People v. Bates’s Empirical Analysis
1988
Citation profile
16 federal appellate · 53 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 88 later decisions — most recently May 2023 · most notably 224 Ill. 2d 115 - People v. Harris (2007), Freeman v. Page (2000)
16 federal appellate · 53 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 111 Ill. 2d 416 - Mega v. Holy Cross Hospital · 4 Ill. 2d 342 - Orlicki v. McCarthy · 95 Ill. 2d 223 - Moore v. Jackson Park Hospital · 73 Ill. 2d 78 - Hupp v. Gray · 74 Ill. 2d 117 - City of Springfield v. Allphin
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 88 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"There is * * * an important distinction between the limitation provision at issue here and [other statutes of limitation] * * * The limitation provision in the Post Conviction Hearing Act provides that no action may be brought more than 10 years after rendition of final judgment, `unless the petitioner alleges facts showing that the delay was not due to his culpable negligence.' [Citation.] The limitations statutes involved in the other cases discussed do not contain such qualification. In our judgment, this language creates a special `safety valve,' unique to the Post Conviction Hearing Act * * *." Bates, 124 Ill.2d at 87-88 , 124 Ill.Dec. 407 , 529 N.E.2d 227 .”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence““No proceedings under this Article shall be commenced more than ** years from the date of conviction *** unless the petitioner alleges facts showing that the delay was not due to his culpable negligence.” (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1991, ch. 38, par. 122 — 1.)”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““the legislature, having created rights of action under [the Acts], had the corresponding power to repeal those rights. In other words, persons, had no ‘vested’ rights in statutory remedies. [Citation.] Moreover, the power to repeal statutory enactments includes the lesser power to impose or modify time limitations for bringing actions under such acts.” Bates, 124 Ill. 2d at 85 .”
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.