145 Ill. 2d 252 - Flesner v. Youngs Development Co.’s Empirical Analysis
1991
Citation profile
19 federal appellate · 55 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 95 later decisions — most recently March 2026 · most notably 175 Ill. 2d 159 - Timberlake v. Illini Hospital (1997), Carr v. Tillery (2010)
19 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 119 Ill. 2d 338 - Gendek v. Jehangir · 67 Ill. App. 3d 385 - Smith v. Chicago Transit Authority · 101 Ill. App. 3d 741 - LaBarge, Inc. v. Corn Belt Bank · 173 Ill. App. 3d 1034 - Relaford v. Kyaw · Harrison v. Woyahn
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 95 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"I believe that section 13 — 217 is a saving provision which is not intended to come into operation during the applicable statute of limitations, but rather to operate only when the limitations period may serve to cut off a plaintiff’s action. The statute allows the plaintiff an opportunity to take full advantage of whatever time is available under the applicable statute of limitations, and should that limitations period have run or be on the verge of running, allow the plaintiff one final opportunity to salvage his cause. There is no danger of prejudice to the defendant under these circumstances since the threat of continual filings is cut off upon reaching the applicable statute of limitations and then the one potential use of section 13 — 217.” Flesner, 145 ill. 2d at 262-63, 582 N.E.2d at 725 (Cunningham, J., dissenting, joined by Clark, J.).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent“the action is voluntarily dismissed by the plaintiff, or the action is dismissed for want of prosecution, * * * the plaintiff, his or her heirs, executors or administrators may commence a new action within one year or within the remaining period of limitation, whichever is greater, after * * * the action is voluntarily dismissed by the plaintiff.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.