Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 156 Ill. App. 3d 49 - Tan v. Boyke

156 Ill. App. 3d 49 - Tan v. Boyke’s Empirical Analysis

1987

Citation profile

63
cited by 63 later decisions
2
states following
September 2025
most recently cited

15 federal appellate · 35 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 63 later decisions — most recently September 2025 · most notably Ampat/Midwest, Inc. v. Illinois Tool Works Inc. (1990), Federal Deposit Insurance v. W.R. Grace & Co. (1989)

15 federal appellate · 35 state decisions

28019871990200020102020decided

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 91 Ill. 2d 69 - Moorman Manufacturing Co. v. National Tank Co. · 79 Ill. 2d 282 - Soules v. General Motors Corp. · 72 Ill. App. 3d 37 - Mother Earth, Ltd. v. Strawberry Camel, Ltd. · 64 Ill. App. 3d 190 - Perlman v. Time, Inc. · 113 Ill. App. 3d 580 - Frahm v. Urkovich

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 63 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “(1) A false statement of material fact; (2) by a party who knows or believes it to be false; (3) with the intent to induce another to act; (4) action by another in reliance on the statement's truth; and (5) injury to the other resulting from that reliance. In addition, the injured party must have been justified in relying on the other's statement.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “In determining whether a party justifiably relies on another's representations, all of the circumstances surrounding the transactions, including the parties' relative knowledge of the facts available, opportunity to investigate the facts and prior business experience, will be taken into consideration. Only where the parties do not have equal knowledge, or access thereto, or where there are other peculiar circumstances inducing the injured party to rely solely on the representation of the other will a person be found to have justifiably relied upon the others' representations. The plaintiffs herein were experienced business persons.... There was ample opportunity for the plaintiffs to conduct their own investigation.... Apparently they chose not to do so. On these facts we do not hesitate to affirm the finding by the trial judge that no actionable fraud could be found.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““It is clear that only a complicated analysis of the plat of survey and the applicable zoning ordinances would have revealed to the plaintiff the irregularities in construction and the resulting illegality of the buildings. Without some indication that the buildings had been improperly or illegally constructed, it is unlikely that a reasonably prudent prospective purchaser would have undertaken so extensive an analysis of the ordinance. *** We conclude the plaintiff reasonably and justifiably relied on the defendant’s silence.” 156 Ill. App. 3d at 58 .”
    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.