Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 1 Ohio App. 2d 244 - Zander v. Blumenthal

1 Ohio App. 2d 244 - Zander v. Blumenthal’s Empirical Analysis

1964

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
2
states following
June 2025
most recently cited

8 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently June 2025

8 state decisions

401964197019801990200020102020decided

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.

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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““We also determine that the doctrine of merger does not obtain in the instant case. Where the acceptance of a deed is induced by false representations, or by representations that in the exercise of reasonable diligence one should know to be false, the representations and the deed are distinct and the representations are not merged in the deed.” (p. 249) (Emphasis supplied.) Cf. also Fries v. Gannon (Hamilton County, 1918), 9 Ohio App. 387 .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.