282 Ill. App. 3d 378 - Bennett v. Gordon’s Empirical Analysis
1996
Citation profile
15 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently September 2022
15 state decisions
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 157 Ill. 2d 484 - Torcasso v. Standard Outdoor Sales, Inc. · 151 Ill. 2d 285 - People Ex Rel. Burris v. Progressive Land Developers, Inc. · 172 Ill. 2d 386 - Nottage v. Jeka · 154 Ill. 2d 174 - In Re Marriage of Pagano · 49 Ill. App. 3d 329 - Seniuta v. Seniuta
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.
“"We find that there is a nexus between plaintiff's defense to the fee petition and her malpractice action. It is apparent from a review of the record that plaintiff raised substantially the same issues in her defense to the fee petition as she raised in her first amended complaint. For example, in plaintiff's defense to the fee petition, plaintiff alleged that defendants conducted inadequate discovery in failing to obtain appraisals and accountings of all of Bennett's assets. In her malpractice action, plaintiff alleges that defendants failed to contact critical witnesses necessary to ascertain the value of Bennett's holdings. Similarly, in her defense to the fee petition, plaintiff alleged that defendants failed to execute the paperwork necessary to transfer stocks, property and a pension to her. In her amended complaint, plaintiff alleged that defendants failed to execute the documents necessary to effectuate an immediate transfer of marital property and the policeman's fund pension to plaintiff upon entry of judgment. While plaintiff's malpractice claims are more fully developed, both sets of allegations arise from the same core of facts. Unlike Torcasso , the resolution of plaintiff's cause of action involves an examination of the same facts and issues raised in defense to the fee petition. Recovery under these facts constitutes but a single cause of action." Bennett , 282 Ill. App. 3d at 383 -84 , 217 Ill.Dec. 924 , 668 N.E.2d 109 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“'The proper test to determine identity of causes of action for res judicata purposes is whether actions are based upon a common core of operative facts.' Horton v. Caterpillar, Inc. , 260 Ill. App. 3d 150 , 153 [ 198 Ill.Dec. 450 , 632 N.E.2d 1061 ] (1994). A plaintiff may plead more than one theory of recovery arising from a single group of facts. However, these multiple theories of relief constitute but a single cause of action for purposes of res judicata . Torcasso v. Standard Outdoor Sales, Inc. , 157 Ill. 2d 484 [ 193 Ill.Dec. 192 , 626 N.E.2d 225 ] (1993). 'If the same facts are essential to maintain both proceedings or the same evidence is necessary to sustain the two, there is identity between the causes of action asserted, and res judicata bars the latter one.' Torcasso , 157 Ill. 2d at 491 [ 193 Ill.Dec. 192 , 626 N.E.2d 225 ] * * *.”
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.