Maciukevicius v. Zagorski’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““We disagreed that the plaintiff, who may have been flustered and nervous, broke down or lost such control that the jury would have been unduly influenced or sympathetic. *** In any event, the trial judge was in the best position to assess whether defendants’ objection had any merit. Moreover, emotional outbursts by parties to personal injury cases are not grounds for mistrial where such conduct is neither intentional nor simulated and its effect is not so prejudicial as to have indisputably affected the jury’s ability to try the case fairly.” ( 172 Ill. App. 3d at 308 .)”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 186 Ill. App. 3d 758 - DeYoung v. Alpha Construction Co.

2. ““We have reviewed the challenged questions and objections. Without expressing an opinion as to the correctness of the court’s rulings on specific objections, we find that the line of questioning (primarily concerning the medical testimony) was not so far out of line as to constitute improper conduct on the part of plaintiff’s counsel.” ( 172 Ill. App. 3d at 310 .)”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 206 Ill. App. 3d 686 - Salmen v. Kamberos