Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 310 ILL 599 - Vyverberg v. Vyverberg

Vyverberg v. Vyverberg’s Empirical Analysis

1923

Citation profile

19
cited by 19 later decisions
2
states following
May 1988
most recently cited

19 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently May 1988

19 state decisions

501923193019401950196019701980decided

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 Palenske v. Palenske · Allerton v. Hopkins · Ebert v. Gerding · Hedges v. Mace · Frothingham v. Petty

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

  1. ““On a bill of review for errors apparent on the face of the record the court is precluded from an investigation of the evidence, since the decree to be examined in such a case includes only the adjudication, pleadings and the facts as found in the original cause. (Clark v. Waggoner, 283 Ill. 199 .) The questions open for examination are such questions as arise on the pleadings, proceedings and decree. (Palenske v. Palenske, 281 Ill. 574 .) The question is not whether the facts found in the decree under review are in accordance with the evidence, but whether the court correctly applied the law to the facts found by it. If the findings of the court upon matters of fact are not supported by the evidence, the remedy is by appeal or writ of error and not by a bill of review. (Ebert v. Gerding, 116 Ill. 216 .)””
    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.