Illinois Supreme Court· 10/25/1989
Simcox v. Simcox
Citations
- 546 N.E.2d 609
- 131 Ill. 2d 491
- 137 Ill. Dec. 664
- 1989 Ill. LEXIS 127
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- holding that children are not privies of their parents where they are not properly represented in dissolution proceedings, and they are not bound by findings of paternity unless they are made parties to the proceedings
- holding that children are not privies of their parents where they are not properly represented in dissolution proceedings, and they are not bound by findings of paternity unless they are made parties to the proceedings
- although putative father had statutory right to bring paternity action, issue of whether he was barred from such action was not ripe
- although putative father had statutory right to bring paternity action, issue of whether he was barred from such action was not ripe
- children are not in privity with their parents in dissolution proceedings and, as such, are not bound by findings of paternity in such proceedings unless they were parties to the proceedings
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Moran, Ryan
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
48 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Sandra Binion, O/b/o Clifton Binion v. Shirley S. Chater, Commissioner of Social SecuritySeventh Circuit· 1997-03-11· cited 389×
- In Re Estate of HooverIllinois Supreme Court· 1993-06-17· cited 349×
- Callender v. SkilesSupreme Court of Iowa· 1999-04-12· cited 89×
- Dawn D. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1998-04-06· cited 67×
- Singer v. BrookmanAppellate Court of Illinois· 1991-07-19· cited 60×
- Yorulmazoglu v. Lake Forest HospitalAppellate Court of Illinois· 2005-08-05· cited 51×
- In Re Marriage of SchlamAppellate Court of Illinois· 1995-03-28· cited 47×
- Board of Trustees of the Addison Fire Protection District No. 1 Pension Fund v. StampAppellate Court of Illinois· 1993-02-23· cited 42×
- Hardin v. HarshbargerN.D. Illinois· 1993-01-14· cited 39×
- Tedford v. GregoryNew Mexico Court of Appeals· 1998-03-26· cited 36×
- Pryweller v. PrywellerAppellate Court of Illinois· 1991-09-30· cited 31×
- In Re Marriage of FoxAppellate Court of Illinois· 1989-12-06· cited 26×
- Rogers v. People Ex Rel. Department of Public AidAppellate Court of Illinois· 1998-07-09· cited 22×
- In Re Marriage of KlebsAppellate Court of Illinois· 1990-03-26· cited 21×
- In Re Marriage of MesecherAppellate Court of Illinois· 1995-05-16· cited 18×
- Griesmeyer v. LaRosaAppellate Court of Illinois· 1998-12-18· cited 17×
- Lehman v. Continental Health Care, Ltd.Appellate Court of Illinois· 1992-12-23· cited 16×
- DELONEY BY AND THROUGH DELONEY v. DowneySupreme Court of Oklahoma· 1997-07-15· cited 15×
- Pelon v. WallAppellate Court of Illinois· 1994-05-16· cited 15×
- Department of Public Aid Ex Rel. Skelton v. LiesmanAppellate Court of Illinois· 1991-08-29· cited 13×
Cites
10 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Poe v. UllmanSupreme Court· 1961-10-09· cited 1,202×
- Suttles v. VogelIllinois Supreme Court· 1988-12-21· cited 100×
- Kinzer v. City of ChicagoIllinois Supreme Court· 1989-04-20· cited 79×
- Baker by Williams v. WilliamsMississippi Supreme Court· 1987-02-18· cited 46×
- S v. S.Missouri Court of Appeals· 1980-02-04· cited 24×
- Beckwith v. BeckwithDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1976-04-01· cited 17×
- In Re Adoption by KNew Jersey Superior Court App Division· 1966-07-28· cited 14×
- Buzzell v. BuzzellSupreme Judicial Court of Maine· 1967-12-01· cited 11×
- Simcox v. SimcoxAppellate Court of Illinois· 1988-09-27· cited 9×
- Greenlee v. SHEDD AQUARIUMIllinois Supreme Court· 1977-04-05· cited 8×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.