Meyer v. Marshall’s Empirical Analysis
1974
Citation profile
6 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 3 Ill. 2d 375 - La Salle National Bank v. City of Chicago · 57 Ill. App. 2d 1 - Harney v. Cahill · 32 Ill. 2d 11 - People Ex Rel. Pauling v. Misevic · 11 Ill. App. 3d 7 - Herrington v. County of Peoria · 79 Ill. App. 2d 22 - Johnson v. Board of Ed. of City of Chicago
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The sole remaining issue for our consideration is whether as defendants request, costs including attorney’s fees should be assessed against the plaintiffs. The defendants argue that since the plaintiffs brought their action pursuant to section 11 — 13—15 of the Illinois Municipal Code (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1975, ch. 24, par. 11 — 13— 15) which allows a successful plaintiff to recover attorney’s fees and since the Costs Act (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1971, ch. 33, par. 8) would have permitted the defendants to recover like costs if they had been successful at trial, they were entitled to recover costs including attorney’s fees against the plaintiffs. But for the error of the trial court in interpreting the Columbia Zoning Ordinance, judgment would have been for defendants. Therefore, we hold that the defendants should be allowed to recover costs, including attorney’s fees against the plaintiffs.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Meyer v. Marshall
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.