179 Ill. 2d 173 - Paris v. Feder’s Empirical Analysis
1997
Citation profile
180 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 188 later decisions — most recently August 2024 · most notably 204 Ill. 2d 159 - People v. Donoho (2003), 228 Ill. 2d 200 - Cinkus v. Village of Stickney Municipal Officers Electoral Board (2008)
180 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 153 Ill. 2d 76 - Abrahamson v. Illinois Department of Professional Regulation · 138 Ill. 2d 178 - Kraft, Inc. v. Edgar · 176 Ill. 2d 1 - Advincula v. United Blood Services · Solich v. George & Anna Portes Cancer Prevention Center of Chicago, Inc. · 175 Ill. 2d 166 - Lucas v. Lakin
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 188 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The cardinal rule of statutory construction is to ascertain and give effect to the true intent of the legislature. [Citation.] The best evidence of legislative intent is the language used in the statute itself, which must be given its plain and ordinary meaning. [Citations.] The statute should be evaluated as a whole, with each provision construed in connection with every other section. [Citation.] If legislative intent can be ascertained from the statute’s plain language, that intent must prevail without resort to other interpretive aids.” Paris v. Feder, 179 Ill. 2d 173, 177 (1997).”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The best evidence of legislative intent is the language used in the statute itself, which must be given its plain and ordinary meaning.”
3 later decisions 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.