Montgomery v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

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

1. “The claim presented here is based on the same set of facts [as the federal habeas case]: namely, the wrongful acts of the State’s Attorney. The pertinent inquiry is: “Can the State of Illinois be liable for the wrongful acts of a State’s Attorney?” If a suit were presented in a court of record, and if the State were suable, on the theory that a violation of the Constitution was a “claim founded on a law of the State,” it would be necessary to determine whether or not a State’s Attorney was an agent of the State, and, if so, was the act one that would make the State liable.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 726 F. Supp. 198 - Santiago v. Daley

2. “For this Court to hold the State liable for the unlawful acts of a State’s Attorney would create a situation making the State liable for malfeasance and unauthorized acts of State’s Attorneys throughout the entire State, and would result in endless difficulties, which would be subversive to the public interest.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 726 F. Supp. 198 - Santiago v. Daley

3. “This Court, therefore, concludes that the State’s Attorney in the instant case is not, and could not be an agent of the State.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 726 F. Supp. 198 - Santiago v. Daley