58 Ill. 2d 146 - McNellis v. Combustion Engineering, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
1974
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 111 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 116 later decisions — most recently June 2014 · most notably 61 Ill. 2d 494 - Davis v. Commonwealth Edison Co. (1975), 76 Ill. 2d 481 - Norton v. Wilbur Waggoner Equipment Rental and Excavating Co. (1979)
3 federal appellate · 111 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 37 Ill. 2d 273 - Miller v. DeWitt · 33 Ill. 2d 316 - Larson v. Commonwealth Edison Co. · 55 Ill. 2d 121 - Halberstadt v. Harris Trust & Savings Bank · Gannon v. Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific Railway Co. · 35 Ill. 2d 533 - Kobus v. Formfit 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 116 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ §1. That all scaffolds, hoists, cranes, stays, ladders, supports, or other mechanical contrivances, erected or constructed by any person, firm or corporation in this State for the use in the erection, repairing, alteration, removal or painting of any house, building, bridge, viaduct, or other structure, shall be erected and constructed, in a safe, suitable and proper manner, and shall be so erected and constructed, placed and operated as to give proper and adequate protection to the life and limb of any person or persons employed or engaged thereon, or passing under or by the same, and in such manner as to prevent the falling of any material that may be used or deposited thereon. * * * §9. Any owner, contractor, sub-contractor, foreman or other person having charge of the erection, construction, repairing, alteration, removal or painting of any building, bridge, viaduct or other structure within the provisions of this act, shall comply with all the terms thereof, * ° Ill. Rev. Stat. 1979, ch. 48, pars. 60, 69.”
9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“. at the time of decedent’s injury he was trimming a tree; he was not working on the transmission line and thus not engaged in the “ * * * erection, repairing, alteration, removal or painting of any * * * building * * * or other structure” as provided in [the Act]. Nor are we persuaded by defendant’s argument that the title of the act “an act providing for the protection and safety of persons in and about the construction, repairing, alteration or removal of buildings, bridges, viaducts and other structures” means that the application of the Act is “not to be limited to work done directly on or in the structure,” and that under the factual circumstances pleaded liability under the Act should attach.”
5 later decisions 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.