83 Ill. App. 3d 1130 - Hamming v. Murphy’s Empirical Analysis
1980
Citation profile
7 federal appellate · 37 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 55 later decisions — most recently May 2019 · most notably Teamsters Local 282 Pension Trust Fund v. Angelos (1985), 240 Ill. App. 3d 737 - Grossinger Motorcorp, Inc. v. American National Bank & Trust Co. (1992)
7 federal appellate · 37 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 79 Ill. 2d 282 - Soules v. General Motors Corp. · 73 Ill. 2d 100 - Greene v. City of Chicago · 72 Ill. App. 3d 37 - Mother Earth, Ltd. v. Strawberry Camel, Ltd. · 66 Ill. App. 2d 134 - Broberg v. Mann · 20 Ill. 2d 89 - Schmidt v. Landfield
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 55 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Generally, one is not entitled to rely upon a representation of law as both parties are presumed to be equally capable of knowing and interpreting the law____ The existing zoning of the property and the procedures under which a zoning ordinance could be modified, or a variance or permit could be granted, are a matter of public record available to both parties. We conclude plaintiff was charged with knowledge of the permitted uses of this property under applicable zoning ordinances and cannot base her action for rescission on any contrary representations made by defendant.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[generally, one is not entitled to rely upon a representation of law as both parties are presumed to be equally capable of knowing and interpreting the law.... We conclude plaintiff was charged with knowledge of the permitted uses of this property under applicable zoning ordinances ....”
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.