Union County v. Merscorp, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
735 F.3d 730 · 2013
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Landmark National Bank v. Kesler · 197 Ill. App. 3d 713 - Schaumburg State Bank v. Bank of Wheaton · 314 Ill. App. 3d 631 - Federal National Mortgage Ass'n v. Kuipers · Field v. Ridgely · 141 Ill. App. 3d 916 - Dana Point Condominium Ass'n v. Keystone Service 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.
“[A] moment’s reflection will reveal the shallowness of [the counties’] recourse to “plain meaning,” a tired, overused legal phrase. For suppose a department store posts the following notice: “All defective products must be returned to the fifth floor counter for refund.” Obviously this is not a command that defective products be returned; the purchaser is free to keep a defective product, throw it out, or give it as a present to his worst friend. There’s an implicit “if’ in the command: If you want to return a product and get a refund, here’s where you have to return it. Similarly, section 28 of the Conveyances Act may just mean that if you want to record your property interest you must do so in the county in which the property is located.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“shall be recorded in the county in which such real estate is situated”
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.