Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 362 Ill. App. 3d 523 - Corcoran-Hakala v. Dowd

362 Ill. App. 3d 523 - Corcoran-Hakala v. Dowd’s Empirical Analysis

2005

Citation profile

40
cited by 40 later decisions
1
states following
September 2025
most recently cited

6 federal appellate · 27 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 40 later decisions — most recently September 2025 · most notably 402 Ill. App. 3d 848 - Whittmanhart, Inc. v. CA, INC. (2010), 372 Ill. App. 3d 362 - Dalan/Jupiter, Inc. v. Draper & Kramer, Inc. (2007)

6 federal appellate · 27 state decisions

290200520102020decided

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 184 Ill. 2d 290 - River Park, Inc. v. City of Highland Park · 207 Ill. 2d 359 - Van Meter v. Darien Park Dist. · 201 Ill. 2d 403 - Robinson v. Toyota Motor Credit Corp. · 197 Ill. 2d 381 - Nowak v. St. Rita High School · 157 Ill. 2d 484 - Torcasso v. Standard Outdoor Sales, Inc.

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

  1. “if the defendant's claim involves the same operative facts as the plaintiff's claim, res judicata may bar the defendant from raising his or her claim in a subsequent action.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  2. “[I]t is true that, in Illinois, counterclaims are generally permissive rather than mandatory. [Citations.] Thus, a defendant generally may raise his or her claim against the plaintiff by way of a counterclaim or by way of a separate action. [Citation.] However, if the defendant's claim involves the same operative facts as the plaintiff's claim, res judicata may bar the defendant from raising his or her claim in a subsequent action.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  3. “res judicata bars a subsequent action if successful prosecution of that action would in effect nullify the judgment entered in the initial action.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent

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.