97 Ill. App. 3d 6 - Seago v. Roy’s Empirical Analysis
1981
Citation profile
12 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently December 2017
12 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 56 Ill. 2d 372 - Cunis v. Brennan · 78 Ill. App. 3d 146 - In Re Marriage of Sanborn · 28 Ill. App. 3d 917 - Baier v. State Farm Insurance · Murphy v. Illinois State Trust Co. · 46 Ill. App. 3d 95 - Chicago & North Western Railway Co. v. Peoria & Pekin Union Railway Co.
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Whether such a legal duty exists may well become a legal question for the court to decide. [Citation omitted.] Based on the record before us which indicates the stairway led only to plaintiff's apartment, there is insufficient evidence to find ... a duty to fix the stairway and its railing.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Nunez v. Diaz · Hiatt v. Tallmage“"Merely because a landlord makes minor repairs or cosmetic changes to rental property, he does not thereby become accountable to fix areas under the tenant's control or assume liability from consequent injuries that occur in those areas. A duty is an affirmative obligation to act or refrain from acting so as to avoid creating an unreasonable risk of harm to another. Where a party's conduct, as opposed to his express agreement, is the premise for imposing such a duty, the acts or omissions giving rise to the conduct must be substantial and clearly delineated. If not, the placement of liability for any resulting injury is anyone's guess. And, the possibility that an accident could happen is no foundation upon which to assign fault. The evidence of record does not support the conclusion that the activities of the [defendants] were of such a degree to establish their control of the stairway. Nor were the few intermittent repairs made by the prior landlord clearly defined, continuous, or substantial to show control. The trial judge was correct in finding the [defendants] did not control the stairway where [the plaintiff] fell. Thus, the [defendants] had no duty to repair. Accordingly, since a duty was not owed, plaintiff's claim could not have succeeded at trial. Summary judgment, given such circumstances, was proper." Seago , 97 Ill. App. 3d at 9 , 53 Ill.Dec. 849 , 424 N.E.2d 640 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Nunez v. Diaz“[w]here a stairway leads, the use to which it is put and by whom, are factors to be considered by the trier of fact along with the intention of the parties, the terms of their lease, the responsibility for repairs, maintenance and illumination and all other factors which tend to show control in either the landlord or the tenant.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Nunez v. Diaz
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.