Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 32 Ill. App. 2d 214 - Conner v. McGrew

32 Ill. App. 2d 214 - Conner v. McGrew’s Empirical Analysis

1961

Citation profile

42
cited by 42 later decisions
1
states following
October 2015
most recently cited

41 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 42 later decisions — most recently October 2015 · most notably 25 Ill. App. 3d 625 - Gettemy v. Grgula (1975), 104 Ill. App. 3d 191 - Twait v. Olson (1982)

41 state decisions

330196119701980199020002010decided

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.

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

  1. ““The authorities agree that a driver on a preferential highway does not have an absolute or unqualified right of way that can be asserted regardless of circumstances, distances or speed. Such a driver may not plunge blindly ahead in reliance upon an assumption that the other motorist will obey the law and yield the right of way, nor may he heedlessly proceed into obvious danger. Rather, there is a duty upon such driver to observe due care in approaching and crossing the intersection and to drive as a pmdent person would to avoid a collision when the danger is discovered or, by the exercise of reasonable care, should have been discovered. [Citations.] The Illinois decisions, in applying this rule, have consistently held that it is the function of the jury to determine whether the judgment of the driver on the preferential highway conformed to the standards of the reasonable and prudent man. [Citations.]” ( 32 Ill. App. 2d 214, 217-18 , 177 N.E.2d 417, 418 .)”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “"[A] person approaching a preferred highway is not required to stop * * * long enough to permit any car that he observes on the highway to pass, regardless of its distance from the intersection. [Citation.] The statute requires only that the motorist confronted by a stop sign may, exercising reasonable care, proceed across the intersection after he has stopped and yielded the right of way to such vehicles on the through highway as constitute an `immediate hazard.' [Citations.] The Illinois decisions, however, do not provide a precise formula for determining whether a particular vehicle has conformed to set standards; that question must be determined by the jury [citations], and involves considerations as to relative speeds and distances of the vehicles from the intersection."”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.