156 Ill. App. 3d 708 - Walter v. Hill’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

29 state decisions

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

1. ““the time prescribed or limited had not expired when the original pleading was filed, and if *** the amended pleading grew out of the same transaction or occurrence set up in the original pleading, even though the original pleading was defective in that it failed to allege the performance of some act or the existence of some fact or some other matter which is a necessary condition precedent to the right of recovery or defense asserted, if the condition precedent has in fact been performed ***.” (Emphasis added.) (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1985, ch. 110, par. 2— 616(b).)”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 160 Ill. App. 3d 161 - Abbey v. P. G. Ravingdranathan · 170 Ill. App. 3d 736 - Shanks v. Memorial Hospital

2. ““(a) In any action, whether in tort, contract or otherwise, in which the plaintiff seeks damages for injuries or death by reason of medical, hospital, or other healing art malpractice, the plaintiff’s attorney or the plaintiff, if the plaintiff is proceeding pro se, shall file an affidavit, attached to the original and all copies of the complaint, declaring one of the following: 1. That the affiant has consulted and reviewed the facts of the case with a health professional who the affiant reasonably believes is knowledgeable in the relevant issues involved in the particular action and who practices in the same specialty as the defendant if the defendant is a specialist; that the reviewing health professional has determined in a written report, after a review of the medical record and other relevant material involved in the particular action that there is a reasonable and meritorious cause for the filing of such action; and that the affiant has concluded on the basis of the reviewing health professional’s review and consultation that there is a reasonable and meritorious cause for filing of such action. If the affidavit is filed as to a defendant who is a physician licensed to treat human ailments without the use of drugs or medicines and without operative surgery, a dentist, a podiatrist, or a psychologist, the written report must be from a health professional licensed in the same profession, with the same class of license, as the defendant. For affidavits filed as to all oth”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 173 Ill. App. 3d 1034 - Relaford v. Kyaw

3. ““This course of action would have most fully fulfilled the legislative goal of protecting the substantive rights of the parties while at the same time keeping with the spirit of section 2 — 622 and its purpose of deterring nonmeritorious litigation.” 156 Ill. App. 3d at 711 , 509 N.E.2d at 806 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 189 Ill. App. 3d 945 - Wasielewski v. Gilligan