Eshelman v. Rawalt’s Empirical Analysis
1921
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 41 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 47 later decisions — most recently July 2013 · most notably 22 Ill. 2d 73 - Knierim v. Izzo (1961), 138 Ill. 2d 404 - Loitz v. Remington Arms Co., Inc. (1990)
5 federal appellate · 41 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 Wilkinson v. People · City of Chicago v. Martin · Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul R. R. v. Hall · Lowry v. Coster · Holmes v. Holmes
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 47 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Punitive, vindictive or exemplary damages are allowed in this State where a wrongful act is characterized by circumstances of aggravation, such as willfulness, wantonness, malice or oppression, but to warrant an allowance of such damages the act complained of must not only be unlawful but must partake of a wanton and malicious nature. While the doctrine allowing such damages has been criticised and in some States has been repudiated, it was said in Holmes v. Holmes, 64 Ill. 294 , that the doctrine is too firmly rooted in our jurisprudence to be disturbed.””
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.