Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 387 Ill. 542 - Lewis v. Hill

Lewis v. Hill’s Empirical Analysis

1944

Citation profile

56
cited by 56 later decisions
10
states following
December 2005
most recently cited

54 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 56 later decisions — most recently December 2005 · most notably 174 Ill. 2d 335 - In Re Estate of Wellman (1996), 137 Ill. 2d 1 - In Re Estate of Greenspan (1990)

54 state decisions — followed in 10 states

1701944195019601970198019902000decided

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 Dodge v. Cole · In Re the Accounting of National Bank & Trust Co. · Kingsbury v. Powers · Lenzen v. Miller · Smith v. Smith

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.

  1. “"* * * The rule in respect to the disposition by a guardian of the proceeds of a sale of the ward's real estate is that they must be used by the guardian for the particular object contemplated by the court in granting the license to sell. If the permission to sell was granted for the purpose of maintenance and support, the moneys obtained must be so appropriated. If for the payment of debts, those debts must be paid. Kingbury v. Powers, 131 Ill. 182 , 22 N.E. 479 . The same rule should be applied in respect to moneys realized by a conservator from a sale of his ward's real estate. The county court in this instance directed the sale by the conservator for the purpose of Mrs. Collins' support. The conversion of the real estate into personalty was for that particular purpose and for her benefit alone. The fund produced by the sale cannot, therefore, be regarded as personalty for the benefit of her residuary legatees. All of the real estate of Sarah E. Collins in the possession of her conservator constituted a trust fund to be used, if necessary, for her support and the payment of her debts; and if not so used, then upon her death to go to the persons to whom she had devised the same when able to exercise a testamentary disposition. Conceding that the conservator could properly have used this money for her support or in the payment of her debts and the costs of administering her estate, still the money being on hand and not having been so used or its use so required, it must be r”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “The court must do nothing `wantonly or unnecessarily to alter the ward's property, but on the contrary takes care, for his sake, that if he recovers he shall find his estate as nearly as possible in the same condition as he left it.' ( Lewis v. Hill (1944), 387 Ill. 542, 546 , 56 N.E.2d 619 [, 621].)”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Where land is sold by an order of court for any purpose, it is a fixed principle upon which the court always proceeds that the character of the property shall be changed only so far as may be necessary to accomplish the particular purpose. Pomeroy’s Equity Jurisprudence, vol. 3, p. 1167; Story’s Equity, vol. 2, p. 1101; * * *.”
    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.