Jackson v. Greger’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate · 55 state decisions

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

1. “{¶ 38} “A testimonial privilege applies not only to prohibit testimony at trial, but also to protect the sought-after communications during the discovery process. The purpose of discovery is to acquire information for trial. Because a litigant’s ultimate goal in the discovery process is to elicit pertinent information that might be used as testimony at trial, the discovery of attorney-client communications necessarily jeopardizes the testimonial privilege. Such privileges would be of little import were they not applicable during the discovery process.” Id.”

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Air-Ride v. Dhl Express (Usa), Ca2008-01-001 (11-3-2008) · Cousino v. Mercy St. Vincent Med. Ctr.

2. “[A] showing of good cause under Civ.R. 26(B)(3) requires demonstration of need for the materials - i.e., a showing that the materials, or the information they contain, are relevant and otherwise unavailable. The purpose of the work-product rule is '(1) to preserve the right of attorneys to prepare cases for trial with that degree of privacy necessary to encourage them to prepare their cases thoroughly and to investigate not only the favorable but the unfavorable aspects of such cases and (2) to prevent an attorney from taking undue advantage of his adversary's industry or efforts.' Civ.R. 26(A). To that end, Civ.R. 26(B)(3) places a burden on the party seeking discovery to demonstrate good cause for the sought-after materials.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Summit Park Apts., L.L.C. v. Great Lakes Reinsurance · State ex rel. Ohio Academy of Nursing Homes, Inc. v. Ohio Dept. of Medicaid

3. “{¶ 32} “The following persons shall not testify in certain respects: {¶ 33} “(A)(1) An attorney, concerning a communication made to the attorney by a client in that relation or the attorney’s advice to a client, except that the attorney may testify by express consent of the client or, if the client is deceased, by the express consent of the surviving spouse or the executor or administrator of the estate of the deceased client. However, if the client voluntarily testifies or is deemed by section 2151.421 of the Revised Code to have waived any testimonial privilege under this division, the attorney may be compelled to testify on the same subject.” (Emphasis added.) R.C. 2317.02(A).”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Cousino v. Mercy St. Vincent Med. Ctr. · Estate of Hohler v. Hohler