Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 211 ILL 620 - Miller v. Lanning

Miller v. Lanning’s Empirical Analysis

1904

Citation profile

18
cited by 18 later decisions
6
states following
February 2013
most recently cited

18 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently February 2013

18 state decisions

40190419101920193019401950196019701980199020002010decided

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 Hill v. Reno · Ames v. Ames · Drake v. Merkle

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

  1. ““Objection is also urged that the commissioners did not set off to the appellants their shares of the land as requested in their answer and to the order of sale. The commissioners having found that the land was not. susceptible of division without manifest prejudice to the parties interested, and so reported, the order of sale followed as a matter of course, under tlie statute. If appellants desired to raise the question that the commissioners were not justified in finding that the premises could not be divided, they should have made an objection to their report to that effect and offered evidence in support of their objection. Without such objection and proof we are not authorized to find that their action, and that of the court, was not authorized by the facts in the case.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““Such imperative right (to partition) is, however, limited where part of the estate is owned by infants. The protection of infants and their estates is a duty enjoined upon courts of equity whenever their jurisdiction is invoked on their behalf or for the protection of their property. "When a court of equity is called upon by a'bill to partition lands in which infants are interested, it is the duty of the chancellor to ascertain whether the partition will result beneficially to such infants or to their detriment, and if it will not be for their best interests, partition should be denied.” *”
    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.