152 Ill. App. 3d 144 - Herron v. Underwood’s Empirical Analysis
1987
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently March 2002
4 federal appellate · 7 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 McClugage v. Taylor · 50 Ill. App. 3d 335 - Michalski v. Chicago Title & Trust Co. · McReynolds v. Miller · Deitz v. Deitz · 32 Ill. App. 3d 886 - In Re Estate of Truman
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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Where a grantor makes a deed and delivers it to a third person to be delivered to the grantee upon the happening of some future event, *** and the grantor surrenders all control and dominion over the deed, such act constitutes a complete and valid delivery by the grantor. (McClugage v. Taylor (1933), 352 Ill. 550 , 186 N.E. 145 .) *** In [the] case[ ] of delivery of a deed in escrow to a third person, the controlling question is whether or not the grantor reserved the right to recall or revoke his action. The presumption of law is in favor of delivery, and the burden of proof is upon the grantor *** to show that there was no delivery. (McReynolds v. Miller (1939), 372 Ill. 151 , 22 N.E.2d 951 .) The decisive issue is whether the grantor reserved control over the deed at the time of its delivery, and if there was no such reservation at the time, subsequent attempts to revoke *** are ineffectual, and the delivery is binding.” Herron, 152 Ill. App. 3d at 154-55 , 503 N.E.2d at 1118-19 .”
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.