Tompkins v. DeLeon’s Empirical Analysis
1979
Citation profile
4 district · 81 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 85 later decisions — most recently August 2021 · most notably People v. Leske (1998), People v. Cross (2006)
4 district · 81 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 Washington v. Confederated Bands & Tribes of the Yakima Indian Nation · People v. Silvola · 19 Ill. App. 3d 1055 - Foster v. Englewood Hospital Ass'n · Martinez v. People · Crownover v. Gleichman
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 85 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“When the legislature reenacts or amends a statute and does not change a section previously interpreted by settled judicial construction, it is presumed that it agrees with judicial construction of the statute.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Cooper v. People · People v. Jones“"The statute clearly prevents the [plaintiff] from testifying regarding any events occurring prior to [decedent's] death. The court of appeals' decision creates a judicial exception additional to those set forth in the statute and contradicts the purpose of subsection (a) thereof. As the statute is clear and unambiguous and as the competency of witnesses falls within the area of legislative prerogative, there is no room for judicial modification here. "The majority of the court of appeals relied in part upon the belief that admission of the contested testimony would not subvert the purpose of the statute.... Nonetheless, we agree with the dissenting opinion of the court of appeals that the courts have an obligation to apply the clear language of the statute."”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“"(I) In any such action, suit, or proceeding, a party or interested person may testify to facts occurring after the death of such deceased person. "(II) In any such action, suit, or proceeding, a party or interested person may testify to facts occurring prior to the death of such deceased person concerning events which occurred outside such deceased person's presence and about which such deceased person could not have testified of his own knowledge had he survived." (emphasis supplied)”
2 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.