Knapp v. McCoy’s Empirical Analysis
1982
Citation profile
2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently September 2007
2 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
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Relies on Bradley v. J. F. Batte & Sons of Richmond, Inc. · 46 Ill. 2d 42 - Ingersoll v. Klein · Panter v. Marshall Field & Co. · Panter v. Marshall Field & Co. · 67 Ill. App. 3d 869 - Crinkley v. Dow Jones & Co.
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) Plaintiff has a reasonable expectancy of entering into a valid business relationship. (2) Defendant knows of plaintiffs expectancy. (3) Defendant intentionally interferes in plaintiffs expectancy, preventing it from ripening into a valid business relationship. (4) Plaintiff suffers damages from defendant’s interference.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“To state a cause of action based on a theory of unjust enrichment, a plaintiff must allege that the defendant has unjustly retained a benefit to the plaintiffs detriment, and that defendant's retention of the benefit violates the fundamental principles of justice, equity, and good conscience.”
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.