Daily v. Parker’s Empirical Analysis
152 F.2d 174 · 1945
Citation profile
17 federal appellate · 5 district · 21 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 66 later decisions — most recently January 2024 · most notably 20 Ill. 2d 406 - Dini v. Naiditch (1960), Lloyd v. Loeffler (1982)
17 federal appellate · 5 district · 21 state decisions — followed in 13 states
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 Pavesich v. New England Life Insurance · Bennett v. . Bennett · Kujek v. . Goldman · Walgreen Co. v. Industrial Commission · Yundt v. Hartrunft
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 66 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ * * * [T]he other contentions of the defendant * * * all seem to grow out of the age-old philosophy — ‘whatever is, is right.’ Probably no institution has given life and breath to this thought as freely as the judiciary. They are ever looking for precedents, as they should be. If none be found, however, they may not give up, — lost in darkness. The situation is not hopeless. * * * [I]f no precedents be found, courts can hardly be advisedly called radical if they indulge in lawmaking by decisions, or in a word, engage in judicial empiricism.” Daily v. Parker, 152 F.2d 174, 177 (7th Cir. 1945).”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The duties of each member of the family are measured (at least in theory and in legal conception) by the position, the role, each takes in the family. . . . children of tender years take on the family financial burdens, when father is incapacitated and mother must attend him or for other reasons is unable to contribute to the financial support of the family. Relativity of rights and duties marks the rights and the obligations of the group and relativity is determined in each case by the situation of the family. But relativity does not eliminate or destroy the rights of any member.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Is the family relationship and the rights of the different members therein, arising therefrom, sufficient to support a cause of action in each, the father, mother, or children, against one who breaks it up and destroys rights of the said individual members?”
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.