Shequin v. Shequin’s Empirical Analysis
1915
Citation profile
5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently November 1959
5 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 Dutcher v. Dutcher · Von Trott v. Von Trott · Illinois Steel Co. v. Warras · Edleman v. Edleman · Roelke v. Roelke
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The record shows that the judgment was entered by consent of the attorneys for the plaintiff. “. . . the consent of the plaintiff’s attorneys to the rendition of the judgment is binding upon plaintiff and the prayer of the complaint may be treated amended accordingly.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Balzer v. Weisensel
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.