Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 23 Ill. 2d 357 - Williams v. Pearson

23 Ill. 2d 357 - Williams v. Pearson’s Empirical Analysis

1961

Citation profile

15
cited by 15 later decisions
1
states following
May 1994
most recently cited

13 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently May 1994

13 state decisions

601961197019801990decided

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 22 Ill. App. 2d 502 - Till v. Kara · Matson v. Holliday

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

  1. ““Plaintiffs’ suggestion that the court lacked jurisdiction to try the case in the absence of plaintiffs or their counsel does not merit discussion. That the court had jurisdiction, both of the subject matter and of the parties to the suit, is obvious, and such jurisdiction is not lost merely because one of the parties chooses not to be present on the day set for trial.” Williams, 23 Ill. 2d 357, 360 .”
    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.