113 Ohio App. 3d 8 - Will v. Will’s Empirical Analysis
1996
Citation profile
10 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently September 2015
10 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 Booth v. Booth · In re Jane Doe 1 · Rock v. Cabral · Bobo v. Jewell · 137 Ohio St. 448 - Steiner v. Custer
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A trial court enjoys broad discretion when allocating tax dependency exemptions, and absent a showing of an abuse of discretion, an appellate court may not substitute its judgment for that of the trial court.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“the best interest of the child is furthered when the allocation of the exemption * * * produces a net tax savings for the parents.”
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.