83 Ill. App. 3d 566 - Practical Offset, Inc. v. Davis’s Empirical Analysis
1980
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 30 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 33 later decisions — most recently November 2013 · most notably 142 Ill. App. 3d 584 - Taylor v. City of Beardstown (1986), 105 Ill. App. 3d 521 - Stringer v. Zacheis (1982)
3 federal appellate · 30 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 15 Ill. App. 3d 455 - Kohler v. Woollen, Brown & Hawkins · 46 Ill. App. 2d 147 - Graham v. St. Luke's Hospital · McDermott v. Manhattan Eye, Ear & Throat Hospital · 71 Ill. 2d 306 - Smiley v. Manchester Insurance & Indemnity Co. · 46 Ill. App. 3d 68 - House v. Maddox
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 33 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The law is well settled that an attorney is liable to his client for damages only when he fails to exercise a reasonable degree of care and skill, and the law distinguishes between negligence and mere errors of judgment. [Citations.] The question of whether an attorney has exercised a reasonable degree of care and skill is one of fact [citation], and in Illinois the standard of care against which the attorney’s conduct will be measured must generally be established through expert testimony. [Citations.] However, where ‘the negligence is so grossly apparent * * * that a layman would have no difficulty in appraising it’ [citation] *, as where the record discloses such an obvious, explicit, and undisputed breach of the attorney’s duty of care as letting the statute of limitations run, expert testimony as to the applicable standard of care will not be required, [citations]” 75 Ill. App. 3d 516, 522 . ( 83 Ill. App. 3d 566, 571-72 , 404 N.E.2d 516, 521 ; see also House v. Maddox (1977), 46 Ill. App. 3d 68, 73 , 360 N.E.2d 580, 584 .)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“An attorney's duty to his or her client exists in relation to the scope of representation sought by the client and undertaken by the attorney.”
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.