128 Ohio App. 3d 403 - Hudgins v. Mitchell’s Empirical Analysis
1998
Citation profile
8 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 55 Ohio App. 3d 245 - Kuehn v. Kuehn · 95 Ohio App. 3d 451 - Seegert v. Zietlow · 8 Ohio App. 3d 375 - Cale Products, Inc. v. Orrville Bronze & Aluminum Co. · 61 Ohio App. 2d 101 - McCue v. Buckeye Union Insurance · 35 Ohio App. 3d 133 - Rice v. Bethel Associates, Inc.
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.
“[t]his rule is not applicable to substantive errors, but is intended to permit courts to correct `blunders in execution.'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“[a] trial court has no authority to vacate its final orders sua sponte.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“clerical mistakes in judgments, orders or other parts of the record and errors therein arising from oversight or omission may be corrected by the court at any time on its own initiative or on the motion of any party and after such notice, if any, as the court orders.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. In re K.A.G
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.