21 Ill. App. 3d 380 - Baldwin v. Baldwin’s Empirical Analysis
1974
Citation profile
25 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Dill v. Widman · 52 Ill. App. 2d 262 - Gregory v. Gregory · 18 Ill. App. 3d 202 - Atwater v. Atwater · 120 Ill. App. 2d 263 - Lewis v. Lewis · 8 Ill. App. 3d 625 - Gill v. Gill
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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The third issue raised, to the effect that the back support payments are barred by the doctrine of laches, is not controlling in this case. In the case of Gill v. Gill, 8 Ill. App. 3d 625 , 290 N.E.2d 897 , the court specifically sets out the requirement necessary in order to set up a defense of laches to back support payments. Therein the court set out a four-part test for the application of laches which included among other things injury or prejudice to the defendant in the event relief is accorded to a complainant or the suit is held not to be barred. In this case, as similar to the case of Atwater v. Atwater, 18 Ill. App. 3d 202 , 309 N.E.2d 632 , there is no factual evidence to show prejudice or injury to the appellee as he is merely being asked to pay what he has owed for a number of years and there is no factual showing of prejudice or injury to him.” 21 Ill. App. 3d 380, 382 .”
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.