3 Ill. App. 2d 481 - Durkin v. Lewitz’s Empirical Analysis
1955
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 2 district · 36 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 41 later decisions — most recently November 2018 · most notably 47 Ill. App. 3d 999 - Chisolm v. Stephens (1977), 29 Ill. App. 2d 306 - Fitzsimons v. National Tea Co. (1961)
3 federal appellate · 2 district · 36 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 Viterbo v. Friedlander · Reardon v. Shimelman · Pessagno v. Euclid Inv. Co. · Graham v. City of Chicago · B. Shoninger Co. v. Mann
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 41 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ ‘ “It may be stated as a general rule that there is no absolute duty to keep outside steps free from ice or snow at all times. Where the precipitation is recent or continuous, the duty to remove such obstruction as it forms cannot be imposed, and the dangers therefrom are viewed as the normal hazards of life, for which no owner or person in possession of property is held responsible. It is only when the owner or possessor having a duty to remove snow and ice, improperly permits an accumulation thereof to remain after a reasonable length of time for removal has elapsed, that liability may arise for the unsafe and dangerous condition thereby created.” ’ ””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“* * * a long and dishonorable tradition in jury trials * * *”
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.