90 Ill. App. 3d 622 - Beard v. Gress’s Empirical Analysis
1980
Citation profile
8 federal appellate · 53 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 79 later decisions — most recently May 2021 · most notably Gennari v. Weichert Co. Realtors (1997), 102 Ill. App. 3d 483 - Duhl v. Nash Realty Inc. (1981)
8 federal appellate · 53 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 69 Ill. 2d 320 - Steinberg v. Chicago Medical School · 72 Ill. 2d 179 - Fitzgerald v. Chicago Title & Trust Co. · 60 Ill. 2d 432 - Farley v. Marion Power Shovel Co. · 46 Ill. App. 3d 252 - American Buyers Club of Mt. Vernon v. Honecker · 71 Ill. App. 3d 257 - Lyons v. Christ Episcopal Church
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 79 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Sec. 2. Unfair methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts or practices, including but not limited to the use or employment of any deception, fraud, false pretense, false promise, misrepresentation or the concealment, suppression or omission of any material fact, with intent that others rely upon the concealment, suppression or omission of such material fact, or the use or employment of any practice described in Section 2 of the “Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act”, approved August 5, 1965, in the conduct of any trade or commerce are hereby declared unlawful whether any person has in fact been misled, deceived or damaged thereby. In construing this section consideration shall be given to the interpretations of the Federal Trade Commission and the federal courts relating to Section 5(a) of the Federal Trade Commission Act.” HI. Rev. Stat. 1981, ch. I2IV2, par. 262.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“the use or employment of any deception, fraud, false pretense, false promise, misrepresentation or the concealment, suppression or omission of any material fact, with intent that others rely upon the concealment, suppression or omission of such material fact ... in the conduct of any trade or commerce are hereby declared unlawful whether any person has in fact been misled, deceived or damaged thereby.”
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.