Hamilton v. Nielsen’s Empirical Analysis
678 F.2d 709 · 1982
Citation profile
14 federal appellate · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently June 2003 · most notably Janney Montgomery Scott, Inc. v. Shepard Niles, Inc. (1993), Dragan v. Miller (1982)
14 federal appellate · 5 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 Patterson v. Northern Trust Co. · Rice v. Rice Foundation · 59 Ill. App. 3d 974 - In Re Estate of Minsky · Starr v. Rupp · Busby v. First National Bank
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 31 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[The State of Illinois] has abolished separate probate courts and vested the probate jurisdiction in its courts of general jurisdiction, the circuit courts. The Cook County circuit court has subdivided itself into divisions, one of which is the probate division; but this organizational refinement has no jurisdictional significance. “Since both the probate division and the law division are ... simply divisions of the same constitutional court of general jurisdiction, it follows necessarily that both of these tribunals could have had equal and concurrent subject matter jurisdiction over the [matter at issue].” ... [Retention of federal diversity jurisdiction over such cases will not interfere with the state policy of channeling all probate matters to specialized courts.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“"Where a beneficiary brings a suit against his trustee which is groundless, the solicitor's fees and expenses of the trustee in defending the charge are to be paid out of the share of the complainant in the trust estate and not charged against the estate generally nor a general fund by which co-beneficiaries would have to contribute. The suit by Patterson [complainant] was frivolous, oppressive and a wrongful attempt to relitigate matters already decided, and the rule that his share of the trust estate should pay the expenses applies with all its force." ( 286 Ill. at 567 , 122 N.E. at 56-57 .)”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“This is not to say, of course, that federal courts can now probate wills in Illinois because the state has abolished its specialized probate courts. Probate remains a peculiarly local function which federal courts are ill equipped to perform.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Storm v. Storm
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.