141 Ill. App. 3d 871 - Street v. Hubert’s Empirical Analysis
1986
Citation profile
24 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 24 later decisions — most recently March 2010
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 43 Ill. 2d 54 - Rozny v. Marnul · 79 Ill. 2d 295 - Anderson v. Wagner · 111 Ill. 2d 416 - Mega v. Holy Cross Hospital · Ackerley Communications, Inc. v. City of Seattle · 95 Ill. 2d 223 - Moore v. Jackson Park Hospital
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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“No action to void or revoke a consent to or surrender for adoption, including an action based on fraud or duress, may be commenced after 12 months from the date the consent or surrender was executed.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“"We believe that the instant case is a prime example of where to permit the action would frustrate the purpose of the Adoption Act, which is to promote stable family relationships free from unnecessary intrusion. [Citation.] The 1982 amendment to the Act was designed to accomplish this objective by cutting off the prolonged ability of the natural parents to set aside an adoption decree. The legislature sought to eliminate this threat by shortening the period from five years under the general limitations statute to include the [1982] amendment to reduce the period to one year from the time the adoption decree was executed. If we accepted the plaintiff's position, allowing an action to set aside an adoption decree from the time of discovery of the fraud would in effect render adoption decrees vulnerable indefinitely to attack. This result would be inconsistent with the aims of the amendment and the overall purpose of the Act." Street v. Hubert, 141 Ill.App.3d at 874 , 96 Ill.Dec. 215 , 491 N.E.2d 29 .”
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.