Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 233 ILL 597 - Powers v. Heffernan

Powers v. Heffernan’s Empirical Analysis

1908

Citation profile

33
cited by 33 later decisions
11
states following
June 1987
most recently cited

33 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 33 later decisions — most recently June 1987 · most notably Cheda v. Bodkin (1916), Thomas v. Morgan (1925)

33 state decisions — followed in 11 states

100190819101920193019401950196019701980decided

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 Lampman v. . Milks · Wells v. . Garbutt · Morrison v. King · Dillman v. Hoffman · Brigham v. Smith

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

  1. ““The rule of the common law upon the subject is, that where the owner of two heritages, or of one heritage consisting of several parts, has arranged and adapted these so that one derives a benefit or advantage from the other of a continuous and obvious character, and he sells one of them without making mention of those incidental advantages or burdens of one in respect to the other, there is in the silence of the parties an implied understanding and agreement that these advantages and burdens, respectively, shall continue as before the separation of the title.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““. . . . Necessity for, and right of, access may indeed be relinquished by express words clearly indicating an intention to do so, but general covenants which do not indicate that such relinquishment was in the mind of the covenantor will not be construed as a waiver of such necessary easements.....” ( 233 Ill. at page 604 , 84 N.E. 661, 664 )”
    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.