Moore v. Moyle’s Empirical Analysis
1950
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 31 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 44 later decisions — most recently November 2007 · most notably 33 Ill. 2d 326 - Darling v. Charleston Community Memorial Hospital (1965), 18 Ill. 2d 11 - Molitor v. Kaneland Community Unit District No. 302 (1959)
2 federal appellate · 31 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 Siidekum v. Animal Rescue League of Pittsburgh · Parks v. Northwestern University · Glavin v. Rhode Island Hospital · Northland Insurance Company v. Bashor · Marabia v. Mary Thompson Hospital of Chicago for Women & Children
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 44 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““* * * that the trust funds of charitable corporations are immune from liablity for the torts of the corporation’s employees and agents. Beyond that, the rule of respondeat superior is in effect.” Moore v. Moyle, 405 Ill. 555 , 92 N.E.2d 81, 87 .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““* * * not merely that the assets of the university were exempt from execution on the judgment but that plaintiff was barred from reeover-ing * * *. If, therefore, this court is now holding that the presence of unprotected assets does not affect liability — in other words, that judgment must be rendered on the merits regardless of the charitable nature of the defendant institution — it is difficult to see how the present holding can possibly be reconciled with that of the Parks case. Moreover, the question presumably of controlling importance, namely the manner in which a judgment can be collected or enforced, is not before the court in the present state of the record. The issue to be determined is whether defendant is immune from liability, not whether a liability reduced to judgment can be subsequently satisfied from assets held by the institution.” (Emphasis supplied.) Moore v. Moyle, 405 Ill. 555 , 92 N.E.2d 81, 87 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent““[T]he question of insurance in no way affects the liability of the institution, but would only go to the question of the manner of collecting any judgment which might be obtained, without interfering with, or subjecting the trust funds or trust-held property to, the judgment. The question as to whether or not the institution is insured in no way affects its liability any more than whether a charitable institution holding private nontrust property or funds would affect its liability. These questions would only be of importance at the proper time, when the question arose as to the collection of any judgment out of nontrust property or assets.””
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.