Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 328 Ill. App. 3d 1056 - Weidner v. Midcon Corp.

328 Ill. App. 3d 1056 - Weidner v. Midcon Corp.’s Empirical Analysis

2002

Citation profile

23
cited by 23 later decisions
1
states following
July 2025
most recently cited

23 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently July 2025

23 state decisions

120200220102020decided

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 174 Ill. 2d 482 - Connick v. Suzuki Motor Co., Ltd. · 172 Ill. 2d 399 - Anderson v. Vanden Dorpel · 230 Ill. App. 3d 40 - Ray Dancer, Inc. v. D M C Corp. · 129 Ill. 2d 497 - Adkins v. Sarah Bush Lincoln Health Center · 309 Ill. App. 3d 192 - Gallagher Corp. v. Russ

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

  1. ““A plaintiff cannot rely simply on mere conclusions of law or fact unsupported by specific factual allegations, regardless of whether they generally inform the defendant of the nature of the claim against him or her. Grund v. Donegan, 298 Ill. App. 3d 1034, 1039 , 700 N.E.2d 157, 161 (1998); Hirsch [v. Feuer], 299 Ill. App. 3d [1076,] 1081, 702 N.E.2d [265,] 270[(1998)]. In other words, an actionable wrong cannot be made out merely by characterizing acts as having been wrongfully done. Adkins v. Sarah Bush Lincoln Health Center, 129 Ill. 2d 497, 520 , 544 N.E.2d 733, 744 (1989).” Weidner v. Midcon Corp., 328 Ill. App. 3d 1056, 1059 (2002).”
    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.