Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 108 Ohio App. 3d 656 - McGee v. C & S Lounge

108 Ohio App. 3d 656 - McGee v. C & S Lounge’s Empirical Analysis

1996

Citation profile

34
cited by 34 later decisions
1
states following
January 2025
most recently cited

34 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 34 later decisions — most recently January 2025 · most notably 124 Ohio App. 3d 525 - Vanest v. Pillsbury Co. (1997), State ex rel. Jackson v. Ohio Adult Parole Auth. (Slip Opinion) (2014)

34 state decisions

1701996200020102020decided

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 GTE Automatic Electric, Inc. v. ARC Industries, Inc. · State v. Jenkins · AAAA Enterprises, Inc. v. River Place Community Urban Redevelopment Corp. · Huffman v. Hair Surgeon, Inc. · Colley v. Bazell

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

  1. “[d]iscretion necessarily connotes a wide latitude of freedom of action on the part of the trial court, and a broad range of more or less tangible or quantifiable factors may enter into the trial court's determination. [Thus], two trial courts could reach opposite results on roughly similar facts and neither be guilty of an abuse of discretion.”
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Abuse of discretion will not be found where the reviewing court simply could maintain a different opinion were it deciding the issue de novo, but rather represents an attitude that is unreasonable, arbitrary, or unconscionable.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “` in order to have an `abuse' . . ., the result must be so palpably and grossly violative of fact and logic that it evidences not the exercise of will but perversity of will, not the exercise of judgment but defiance thereof, not the exercise of reason but rather of passion or bias.'”
    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.