Cienki v. Rusnak’s Empirical Analysis
1947
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 21 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently May 1983 · most notably 68 Ill. 2d 399 - Crothers v. La Salle Institute (1977), 33 Ill. 2d 566 - Mooney v. Underwriters at Lloyd's, London (1965)
5 federal appellate · 21 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 Forest Preserve District v. Lehmann Estate, Inc. · Rosehill Cemetery Co. v. City of Chicago · Clayton v. Feig · Watt v. Cecil · Town of Kaneville v. Meredith
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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The failure to file a reply did not constitute an admission of the well-pleaded facts set forth in the amended answer for the reason that defendant, in introducing evidence in support of each affirmative defense, must be deemed to have waived a reply, regardless of the allegedly erroneous order of February 28 and regardless of his denial of waiver made at the commencement of the trial. Where, in the absence of a reply, defendant introduces evidence to prove an affirmative defense, the failure to file a reply is waived and the absence of a reply does not constitute an admission. (Watt v. Cecil, 368 Ill. 510 ; Piot v. Davis, 241 Ill. 434 .) This is true even where defendant specifically asserts at the time of the trial that he does not waive the failure to file a reply. The important and controlling circumstance is not what the defendant says but what he does, and the introduction of evidence in support of affirmative defenses constitutes the waiver.””
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.