Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 368 Ill. 519 - Danoff v. Larson

Danoff v. Larson’s Empirical Analysis

1938

Citation profile

12
cited by 12 later decisions
3
states following
August 2011
most recently cited

2 district · 10 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently August 2011

2 district · 10 state decisions

60193819401950196019701980199020002010decided

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 Hopkins v. Levandowski · Therens v. Therens · Union National Bank v. Byram · Wilson v. Trustees of Schools

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

  1. “"No case has been called to our attention in which it has been held that the power to make rules of practice extends so far as to give a court power to prescribe the time or manner of serving initial process. * * * * * * * * * It seems clear to us that the means by which a person is summoned into court and subjected to its jurisdiction goes deeply into the substance of that person's rights, and is more than a mere matter of form. No matter what may be said as to routine procedure after the court has acquired jurisdiction over a defendant's person, it cannot be denied that the means of obtaining that jurisdiction goes to the very foundation of the principles of due process. Neither the judges of the municipal court nor of this or of any other court, has power to take jurisdiction over the person of a citizen without according him due process of law. Not even the legislature may otherwise provide. The determination of what constitutes due process of law is, in the first instance, a legislative function, limited by the constitution and subject to review by the courts for a determination of whether or not the means provided satisfy the constitutional requirement. After jurisdiction of the person has been obtained by constitutional means, a different situation exists. The orderly and expeditious handling of the court's business requires the observance of rules which do not concern the substantive rights of the defendant, and we think that the power of the judges of the municipal c”
    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.