Ohman v. Ohman’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

14 state decisions

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

1. ““In chancery it is incumbent upon the party in whose favor a decree granting relief is entered, to preserve in the record the evidence justifying the decree. Contrary to the rule of law, no presumption will be indulged that evidence sufficient to sustain the decree was heard if such evidence does not appear in the record. The general finding that all the material allegations in the bill are proved and that the equities of the case are with the complainant will not sustain a decree granting relief, where there is no finding of specific facts and the evidence is not preserved in the record. (Village of Harlem v. Suburban Railroad Co., 202 Ill. 301 ; Torsell v. Eiffert, 207 Ill. 621 ; Berg v. Berg, 223 Ill. 209 ; Becklenberg v. Becklenberg, 232 Ill. 120 .) Where there has been a verdict of a jury or a report of a master finding the facts, such verdict or report preserves in the record the facts established instead of the evidence heard to establish the facts, and the evidence need not be otherwise preserved. (Thatcher v. Thatcher, 17 Ill. 66 .) In this case there was neither the verdict of a jury, report of a master, depositions filed in the canse nor finding of specific facts in the decree. ’ ’”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 211 Ill. App. 385 - Rang v. Rang