202 Ill. App. 3d 1024 - Prodromos v. Poulos’s Empirical Analysis
1990
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 36 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 59 later decisions — most recently June 2023 · most notably County Commissioners v. J. Roland Dashiell & Sons, Inc. (2000), Bower v. Jones (1992)
4 federal appellate · 36 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 76 Ill. 2d 171 - People v. Vance · 104 Ill. App. 3d 357 - Industrial Lift Truck Service Corp. v. Mitsubishi International Corp. · 72 Ill. App. 3d 296 - Mid-Town Petroleum, Inc. v. Dine · 125 Ill. App. 2d 8 - Madigan v. Buehr · 77 Ill. App. 2d 413 - Wing v. Lederer
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 59 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"Land-Writing-Signature-Exceptions 2. No action shall be brought to charge any person upon any contract for the sale of lands, tenements or hereditaments or any interest in or concerning them, for a longer term than one year, unless such contract or some memorandum or note thereof shall be in writing, and signed by the party to be charged there with, or some other person thereunto by him lawfully authorized in writing, signed by such party. * * *" Ill. Rev.Stat.1987, ch. 59, par. 2.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Under the Statute of Frauds, a person cannot enforce a real estate contract unless: (1) there is a written memorandum or note on one or more documents; (2) the documents collectively contain a description of the property and the terms of sale, including price and manner of payment; and (3) the memorandum or note contains the signature of the party to be charged.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“"When parties enter into a contract they assume certain risks with an expectation of a return. Sometimes, their expectations are not realized, but they discover that under the contract they have assumed the risk of having those expectations defeated. As a result, they have no remedy under the contract for restoring their expectations. In desperation, they turn to quasi-contract for recovery. This the law will not allow. Quasi-contract is not a means for shifting a risk one has assumed under contract. [Citation.]””
1 later decision 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.