85 Ill. 2d 1 - Alvis v. Ribar’s Empirical Analysis
1981
Citation profile
48 federal appellate · 410 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 501 later decisions — most recently December 2023 · most notably 136 Ill. 2d 132 - Ward v. K Mart Corp. (1990), 179 Ill. 2d 367 - Best v. Taylor MacHine Works (1997)
48 federal appellate · 410 state decisions — followed in 16 states
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
Applies 45 U.S.C. § 53 (Federal Employers' Liability Act)
Relies on Pope & Talbot, Inc. v. Hawn · United States v. Reliable Transfer Co. · 74 Ill. 2d 172 - Kelsay v. Motorola, Inc. · 13 Cal. 3d 804 - Nga Li v. Yellow Cab Co. · 20 Cal. 3d 725 - Daly v. General Motors Corp.
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 501 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“We believe that the proper relationship between the legislature and the court is one of cooperation and assistance in examining and changing the common law to conform with the ever-changing demands of the community. There are, however, times when there exists a mutual state of inaction in which the court awaits action by the legislature and the legislature awaits guidance from the court. Such a stalemate is a manifest injustice to the public. When such a stalemate exists and the legislature has, for whatever reason, failed to act to remedy a gap in the common law that results in injustice, it is the imperative duty of the court to repair that injustice and reform the law to be responsive to the demands of society.”
12 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““We hold that this opinion shall be applied to the parties before us on appeal and to all cases in which trial commences on or after June 8,1981, the date on which the mandate in this case shall issue. This opinion shall not be applicable to any case in which trial commenced before that date — except that if any judgment be reversed on appeal for other reasons, this opinion shall be applicable to any retrial.” (Alvis v. Ribar (1981), 85 Ill. 2d 1, 28 , 421 N.E.2d 886, 898 .)”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“form of comparative negligence, i.e., the plaintiff's damages are simply reduced by the percentage of fault attributable to him, even if he is more than 50% at fault. Following the date of this occurrence, the Illinois legislature altered this”
2 later decisions 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.