Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 163 OHIOAPP3D 479 - Joffe v. Cable Tech, Inc.

Joffe v. Cable Tech, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

2005

Citation profile

33
cited by 33 later decisions
1
states following
December 2025
most recently cited

31 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 33 later decisions — most recently December 2025 · most notably 171 Ohio App. 3d 514 - In Re Blue Flame Energy Corp. (2006), 171 Ohio App. 3d 551 - State Ex Rel. Attorney General v. Grand Tobacco (2007)

31 state decisions

150200520102020decided

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 International Shoe Co. v. Washington · Burger King Corporation v. Rudzewicz · World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. Woodson · Helicopteros Nacionales De Colombia, S. A. v. Hall · Shaffer v. Heitner

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

  1. “(A) A court may exercise personal jurisdiction over a person who acts directly or by an agent, as to a cause of action arising from the person’s: (1) Transacting any business in this state; (2) Contracting to supply services or goods in this state; (3) Causing tortious injury by an act or omission in this state; (4) Causing tortious injury in this state by an act or omission outside this state if he regularly does or solicits business, or engages in any other persistent course of conduct, or derives substantial revenue from goods used or consumed or services rendered in this state; (5) Causing injury in this state to any person by breach of warranty * * *; (6) Causing tortious injury in this state to any person by an act outside this state committed with the purpose of injuring persons * * *; (7) Causing tortious injury to any person by a criminal act * * *; (8) Having an interest in, using, or possessing real property in this state; (9) Contracting to insure any person, property, or risk located within this state at the time of contracting.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “'the carrying on or prosecution of business negotiations,' " as well as " 'negotiations which have been either wholly or partly brought to a conclusion.' " (Emphasis omitted.) Id. at 75 , quoting Black's. In Kentucky Oaks Mall Co., the court concluded that a nonresident commercial lessee's conduct of "negotiat[ing] the lease by telephone contact to Ohio with an Ohio-based limited partnership,”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “contacts with the forum state. Helicopteros, 466 U.S. at 416 . General jurisdiction requires a greater amount of contacts than specific jurisdiction. Joffe v. Cable Tech, Inc., 163 Ohio App.3d 479 , 2005- Ohio-4930, ¶ 37 (10th Dist.). Under general jurisdiction, the contacts must be”
    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.