138 Ill. 2d 377 - People v. Williams’s Empirical Analysis
1990
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 55 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 82 later decisions — most recently May 2025 · most notably 217 Ill. 2d 348 - People v. Christopher K. (2005), 233 Ill. 2d 158 - People v. Marker (2009)
3 federal appellate · 55 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 Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Wong Sun v. United States · Brown v. Illinois · Dunaway v. New York · Michigan v. Tucker
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 82 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[N]one of our Taylor line of cases limited the Taylor rule only to those subsidiary issues that may actually have been considered * * *. * * * Each of the Taylor line of cases speaks of an order itself, not merely of issues upon which the order may or may not have turned.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“"Even though the Taylor rule's closest analogue is res judicata doctrine, we judge that the rule admits of one comparison to law-of-the-case doctrine: As with law of the case, if the facts before the court change materially, the court should not be bound by its former interlocutory ruling but can correct itself in light of the newly presented facts. In order to prevent this exception from swallowing the rule, the new evidence should not be of a nature that with due diligence could have been presented earlier." Williams, 138 Ill.2d at 393-94 , 150 Ill.Dec. 498 , 563 N.E.2d 385 .”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“discrete rule of Illinois procedure, independent of such related doctrines as collateral estoppel, law of the case, or even res judicata. Of these three doctrines, the Taylor rule most resembles res judicata.”
2 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.