Hamilton v. Needham’s Empirical Analysis
1986
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 2 district · 9 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently March 2018
2 federal appellate · 2 district · 9 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 Federated Department Stores, Inc. v. Moitie · M. A. P. v. Ryan · Harris v. McRae · 102 Ill. 2d 356 - Ogle v. Fuiten · Schweizer v. Schweizer
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“is internal evidence within the will itself that something may be awry.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“[I]n a legal malpractice action, the plaintiff must present expert testimony establishing the standard of care unless the attorney's lack of care and skill is so obvious that the trier of fact can find negligence as a matter of common knowledge,”
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.