Demarco v. McGill’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

20 state decisions

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

1. ““The rule is that if evidence objected to is competent for any purpose, the party objecting must call the attention of the court specifically to any limitations which he believes should be imposed upon its application to the issues. The trial court is entitled to know what specific insufficiencies exist in the introduction of evidence, and it is unfair to make objections on appeal after concealing the real objections from the lower court. (People v. McCurrie, 337 Ill. 290 .) The rule is that a party objecting to evidence must point out the objections specifically so as to afford the adverse party an opportunity to correct it. (Illinois Iowa Power Co. v. Rhein, 369 Ill. 584 .) A party who seeks to exclude a piece of evidence should be explicit and disclose to the trial court all defects in the proposed proof which he expects to urge upon this court in the event of an appeal. Forest Preserve Disk v. Lehmann Estate, Inc. 388 Ill. 416 .””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 175 Ill. App. 3d 714 - Smith v. Menet

2. ““The rule is that a party objecting to evidence must point out the objections specifically so as to afford the adverse party an opportunity to correct it. [Citation.] A party who seeks to exclude a piece of evidence should be explicit and disclose to the trial court all defects in the proposed proof which he expects to urge upon this court in the event of an appeal.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Casciola v. Gardner