Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 44 Ill. App. 2d 304 - Kinsey v. Thompson

44 Ill. App. 2d 304 - Kinsey v. Thompson’s Empirical Analysis

1963

Citation profile

49
cited by 49 later decisions
5
states following
April 1993
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 46 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 49 later decisions — most recently April 1993 · most notably United States v. Fidelity and Casualty Company of New York (1968), STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INS. CO. v. Budd (1970)

3 federal appellate · 46 state decisions

2501963197019801990decided

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.

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

  1. ““ ‘While the mere pendency of negotiations during a part of a period involved in the statute of limitations, conducted in good faith with a view to a compromise, is not a waiver of the statute of limitations and would not estop a defendant from setting up such defenses [citation], conduct of an insurance company which induces plaintiff to a reasonable belief that his claim will be settled without suit, could constitute a waiver by estoppel to raising the defense of statute of limitations [citations].’ In accordance with this principle, if evidence is introduced depicting conduct by the insurance company which appears to exceed mere investigation and negotiation, a question of fact is created for determination by the trier of fact as to whether the conduct constitutes a waiver by estoppel; otherwise, in the absence of such evidence, the defense of estoppel may be disposed of by the court as a matter of law.” D’Urso at 838-39 .”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““The circumstance, in the case before us, as specified by affidavit, that liability was in fact conceded and that the only question remaining was the amount of the settlement, and that negotiations to this end proceeded both before and after the period of the statute of limitations had run, in our judgment raised the question of fact so that the pleadings filed raising the issue of waiver or estoppel as to the statute of limitations should be inquired into factually before a jury * Kinsey v. Thompson, 44 Ill.App.2d at 307 , 194 N.E.2d at 567 .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.