Dodd v. Croskey’s Empirical Analysis
2015
Citation profile
63 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Cleveland Electric Illuminating Co. v. City of Cleveland · Boley v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. · 16 Ohio St. 2d 16 - Henry v. Central National Bank · Armstrong v. John R. Jurgensen Co. · State v. Schmick
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 63 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“ascertain and give effect to the intention of the General Assembly.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“(1) The 2006 version of the [Dormant Mineral Act] is the only version * * * to be applied after June 30, 2006, the effective date of said statute. (2) To establish a mineral interest as “deemed abandoned” under the 1989 version of the [Dormant Mineral Act], the surface owner must have taken some action to establish abandonment prior to June 30, 2006. In all cases where a surface owner failed to take such action, only the 2006 version of the [Dormant Mineral Act] can be used to obtain relief. (3) To the extent the 1989 version of the [Dormant Mineral Act] remains applicable, the 20-year look-back period shall be calculated starting on the date a complaint is filed which first raises a claim under the 1989 version * * *. (4) For purposes of R.C. 5301.56(B)(3), a severed oil and gas mineral interest is the “subject of’ any title transaction which specifically identifies the recorded document creating that interest by volume and page number, regardless of whether the severed mineral interest is actually transferred or reserved. (5) Irrespective of the savings events in R.C. 5301.56(B)(3), the limitations in R.C. 5301.49 can separately bar a claim under the [Dormant Mineral Act]. (6) T.he 2006 version of the [Dormant Mineral Act] applies retroactively to severed mineral interests created prior to its effective date.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“The Croskey affidavit outlined a history of transactions affecting the mineral rights underlying appellants' surface property. And it identified 36 persons as “current owners of the minerals and oil and gas reserved by the deeds” set forth in the affidavit who “do not intend to abandon their rights to the mineral interest, but intend to preserve their rights.” Id. at ¶ 16. {¶35} Here, the Hines Heirs filed—32 days after the notice of abandonment was published—a document entitled”
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.