Johnson v. Muntz’s Empirical Analysis
1936
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 2 district · 27 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 36 later decisions — most recently April 1986 · most notably 105 Ill. 2d 215 - Harms v. Sprague (1984), 42 Ill. App. 3d 688 - Dixon v. Moller (1976)
3 federal appellate · 2 district · 27 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 Capek v. Kropik · Leupold v. Krause · Taylor v. Taylor · Voss v. Rezgis · Lininger v. Helpenstell
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 36 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Every householder having a family, shall be entitled to an estate of homestead, to the extent in value of $5,000, in the farm or lot of land and buildings thereon, owned or rightly possessed, by lease or otherwise, and occupied by him or her as a residence; and such homestead, and all right and title therein; shall be exempt from attachment, judgment, levy or execution, sale for the payment of his debts, or other purposes, and from the laws of conveyance, descent and devise, except as herein after provided * #”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“‘ * * * If the husband is living and residing with his family he is the householder contemplated by the statute and the homestead estate is vested in him. (Taylor v. Taylor, 223 Ill. 423 [ 79 N.E. 139 ]; Brokaw v. Ogle, 170 id. 115 [ 48 N.E. 394 ].) Two separate homestead estates cannot co-extensively exist in the same premises at the same time. * * * ’”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. In re Hendricks“‘After a review of the previous holdings, we held that Johnson, the husband, was the householder as contemplated in the act; that his homestead estate was a burden upon the several moieties, and that its value was to the extent of $1000 and it could be released only in the manner prescribed by statute. * * *’”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. In re Hendricks
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.