85 Ill. 2d 410 - Rock v. Thompson’s Empirical Analysis
1981
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 1 district · 24 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently April 2022 · most notably 136 Ill. 2d 513 - People Ex Rel. Chicago Bar Ass'n v. State Board of Elections (1990), 157 Ill. 2d 116 - Nevitt v. Langfelder (1993)
4 federal appellate · 1 district · 24 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 Powell v. McCormack · Johnson v. Manhattan Railway Co. · United States v. Ballin · 54 Ill. 2d 552 - People Ex Rel. Ward v. Moran · Reif v. Barrett
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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“It is the duty of the judiciary to construe the Constitution and determine whether its provisions have been disregarded by the actions of any of the branches of government.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage““It is a canon of construction well recognized, not only in this court but in courts of other jurisdictions, as it relates to statutes, that the chief purpose is to give effect to the intention of the legislature. In seeking such intention courts are to consider the language used, the object to be attained or the evil to be remedied. This may involve more than the literal meaning of the words. That which is within the intention is within the statute though not within the letter, and though within the letter it is nevertheless not within the statute if not likewise within the intention. The same general principles to be applied in construing statutes apply in the construction of constitutions. [Citations.] In the construction of a constitution courts should not indulge in speculation apart from the spirit of the document, or apply so strict a construction as to exclude its real object and intent.” ( 85 Ill. 2d at 427-28 , quoting Peabody v. Russel (1922), 301 Ill. 2d 439 , 442-43.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“"[I]t was clear that the Senate was unable to resolve its impasse without help, and the judiciary was the only body it could turn to for help. Had we not acted, the work of the Senate would have gone undone or been open to challenge, and Senators, once having resorted to physical conflict in trying to resolve the controversy, might have continued to do so. Having been presented with this controversy, it was better for us to decide than to avoid decision." ( Rock v. Thompson (1981), 85 Ill.2d 410, 431-32 , 426 N.E.2d 891 (Simon, J. concurring).)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
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.