Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 333 Ill. 636 - Winkelman v. Erwin

Winkelman v. Erwin’s Empirical Analysis

1929

Citation profile

27
cited by 27 later decisions
2
states following
May 1980
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 24 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently May 1980 · most notably 1 Ill. App. 3d 890 - Zamouski v. Gerrard (1971), 67 Ill. 2d 213 - John J. Calnan Co. v. Talsma Builders, Inc. (1977)

3 federal appellate · 24 state decisions

1501929193019401950196019701980decided

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 Steinmeyer v. Schroeppel · Hoops v. Fitzgerald · Ewing v. Sandoval Coal & Mining Co.

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

  1. ““The mistake cannot be said to be due to the negligence of the appellees. They had no knowledge of the boundaries of the land. Mrs. Thompson represented the appellants. She undertook to make the inquiries necessary to determine the location of the boundaries, and the fact that the appellees accepted her statements, based, as she said, upon the inquiries she had made, would not justify holding them responsible for the consequences of. their common mistake. . . . Mrs. Thompson made no intentional misrepresentation, but her statement led the appellees to believe that the twelve acres were included in their purchase. Under these circumstances the appellees, when they discovered the mistake under which they had entered into the contract, were justified in rescinding it.””
    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.