52 Ill. App. 3d 314 - Wetherell v. Matson’s Empirical Analysis
1977
Citation profile
50 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 50 later decisions — most recently September 2020 · most notably 129 Ill. 2d 1 - Schaffner v. Chicago & North Western Transportation Co. (1989), 130 Ill. App. 3d 457 - Lebrecht v. Tuli (1985)
50 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 Consolidated Coal Co. v. Scheiber · Avance v. Thompson · Kavale v. Morton Salt Co. · 20 Ill. App. 3d 656 - Foerster v. Illinois Bell Telephone Co. · 15 Ill. App. 2d 311 - Bunton v. Illinois Central Railroad
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 50 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““If a party to this case has failed to offer evidence within his power to produce, you may infer that the evidence would be adverse to that party if you believe each of the following elements: 1. The evidence was under the control of the party and could have been produced by the exercise of reasonable diligence. 2. The evidence was not equally available to an adverse party. 3. A reasonably prudent person under the same or similar circumstance would have offered the evidence if he believed it to be favorable to him. 4. No reasonable excuse for the failure has been shown.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“"To accept defendant’s argument would require plaintiff to produce every doctor who treated him or be faced with defendant’s insinuations that other, later treating physicians, would have testified adversely.” 52 Ill. App. 3d at 319 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“different, and presumably greater, than the permissible scope of comment during closing argument in this regard.” (Wetherell, 52 Ill. App. 3d at 318-19 .) The appellate court disagreed and said:”
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.