Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 44 Ill. 2d 49 - Canfield v. Spear

44 Ill. 2d 49 - Canfield v. Spear’s Empirical Analysis

1969

Citation profile

135
cited by 135 later decisions
7
states following
April 2023
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 116 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 135 later decisions — most recently April 2023 · most notably 225 Ill. 2d 52 - Mohanty v. St. John Heart Clinic, S.C. (2006), 138 Ill. App. 3d 1045 - McRand, Inc. v. Van Beelen (1985)

3 federal appellate · 116 state decisions

3801969197019801990200020102020decided

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 37 Ill. 2d 32 - House of Vision, Inc. v. Hiyane · 8 Ill. 2d 351 - Bauer v. Sawyer · Hursen v. Gavin · Ryan v. Hamilton · Storer v. Brock

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

  1. ““It cannot be said that the public interest is adversely affected if a physician decides to move from one community to another, nor does it become so if the move results from some agreement made in advance. If a severe shortage exists in any particular place young doctors will tend to move there, thus alleviating the shortage.””
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “In this case the defendant had never lived in Rockford before he joined the clinic in 1965, nor did he bring any patients with him. He was a newcomer to the community, and it was doubtless through the opportunities provided by this association that he became known in the city.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “where the limitation as to time and territory is not unreasonable, the agreement is valid and enforceable, and relief by injunction is customary and proper”
    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.