Horbach v. Kaczmarek’s Empirical Analysis
288 F.3d 969 · 2002
Citation profile
5 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Relies on Erie Co v. Tompkins · West v. American Telephone & Telegraph Co. · 79 Ill. 2d 295 - Anderson v. Wagner · 166 Ill. 2d 72 - Hermitage Corp. v. Contractors Adjustment Co. · 197 Ill. 2d 28 - Morris v. Margulis
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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The essence of conversion is the wrongful deprivation of one who has a right to the immediate possession of the object unlawfully held. An asserted right to money normally will not support a claim for conversion. Only if the money at issue can be described as “specific chattel” — in other words, “a specific fund or specific money in coin or bills” — will conversion lie.”
2 later decisions 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.