34 Ill. App. 3d 382 - Eden v. Eden’s Empirical Analysis
1975
Citation profile
23 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently December 2007
23 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 46 Ill. 2d 249 - Rosewood Corp. v. Fisher · 26 Ill. App. 2d 102 - Widicus v. Southwestern Electric Cooperative, Inc. · 51 Ill. 2d 296 - People v. Javaras · 51 Ill. 2d 76 - People v. Miller · 16 Ill. App. 3d 549 - Sullivan v. Sullivan
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) indirect contempt which entails a contumacious act committed outside the presence of the court (e.g., People v. Javaras [(1972)], 51 Ill. 2d 296, 300 , 281 N.E.2d 670, 672 ; Kay v. Kay [(1974)], 22 Ill. App. 3d 530 , 318 N.E.2d 9 (abstract opinion)); (2) direct contempt which involves an act committed in the presence of the court (e.g., People v. Clark [(1972)], 4 Ill. App. 3d 301, 303 , 280 N.E.2d 723, 724 ; Kotowski v. Kotowski [(1971)], 3 Ill. App. 3d 231, 233 , 278 N.E.2d 856, 857 ); (3) civil contempt which consists of failing to do something ordered by the court, usually for the benefit of the opposing litigant (e.g., People ex rel. Kazubowski v. Ray [(1971)], 48 Ill. 2d 413, 416 , 272 N.E.2d 225, 226 , cert. denied [(1971)], 404 U.S. 818 , 30 L. Ed. 2d 118 , 92 S. Ct. 78 ; Sullivan v. Sullivan [(1973)], 16 Ill. App. 3d 549, 551-52 , 306 N.E.2d 604, 605 ); and (4) criminal contempt which comprises conduct directed against the dignity and authority of the court or the judge acting judicially (e.g., Sullivan v. Sullivan, 16 Ill. App. 3d 549, 551 , 306 N.E.2d 604, 605 ; George v. Tool [(1972)], 6 Ill. App. 3d 329 , 286 N.E.2d 41 (abstract opinion)).” ( 34 Ill. App. 3d at 388 , 340 N.E.2d at 146 .)”
4 later decisions 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.