Schwing v. Miles’s Empirical Analysis
1937
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 49 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 56 later decisions — most recently September 2025 · most notably 133 Ill. 2d 295 - Healy v. Vaupel (1990), 104 Ill. 2d 169 - Senn Park Nursing Center v. Miller (1984)
1 federal appellate · 49 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 Smith v. Truman Reeves · Fitts v. McGhee · Tindal v. Wesley · Ayers Scott McCabe · Christian v. Atlantic N C R
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 56 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““where the action at law or suit in equity is maintained against a State officer or the director of a department on the ground that, while claiming to act for the State, he violates or invades the personal and property rights of the plaintiff under an unconstitutional act, or under an assumption of authority which he does not have, such suit is not against the State. (Noorman v. Department of Public Works and Buildings, supra; Fitts v. McGhee, 172 U.S. 516 ; United States v. Lee, 106 id. 196; White Eagle Oil and Refining Co. v. Gunderson, 205 N.W. (S. Dak.) 614; 43 A.L.R. 397 .) The presumption obtains that the State, or a department thereof, will not, and does not, violate the constitution and laws of the State, but that such violation, if it occurs, is by a State officer or the head of a department of the State, and such officer or head may be restrained by proper action instituted by a citizen.” Schwing, 367 Ill. at 441-42 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““ * * * While a suit against state officials, and, in particular, the Director of the Department of Public Works and Buildings, is not necessarily a suit against the state, the constitutional inhibition cannot be evaded by making an action nominally one against the servants or agents of the state when the real claim is against the state itself, and it is the party vitally interested. * * * ””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“The state of Illinois shall never be made defendant in any court of law or equity.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Parmar v. Madigan
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.