66 Ill. 2d 36 - People v. Chambers’s Empirical Analysis
1976
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 28 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 32 later decisions — most recently June 2018 · most notably 93 Ill. 2d 397 - SJ Groves & Sons Co. v. State (1982), Matter of Appeal in Maricopa County (1994)
1 federal appellate · 28 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 Broadrick v. Oklahoma · Connally v. General Construction Co. · Aptheker v. Secretary of State · Kent v. Dulles · First National Bank in Plant City v. Dickinson
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 32 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The primary interest advanced by the State to justify the restrictions of the statute as to time, place and circumstance is the traditional right of the State to protect its children. The statute proceeds upon the basic assumption that when a child is at home during the late night and early morning hours, it is protected from physical as well as moral dangers.” 66 Ill. 2d 36, 42 .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““By providing a sanction against the parent who knowingly permits a child to violate the statute, the cooperation of the parent is commanded. That sanction may also operate indirectly to enlist cooperation from the child, who may be willing to risk getting into trouble himself, but unwilling to involve his parents in a violation of the law. Parental control is thereby strengthened.” Chambers, 66 Ill. 2d at 42-43 , 360 N.E.2d at 58 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““It is unlawful for a person less than 18 years of age to be present at or upon any public assembly, building, place, street or highway at the following times unless accompanied and supervised by a parent, legal guardian or other responsible companion at least 21 years of age approved by a parent or legal guardian * * *."”
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.