Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 167 Ohio App. 3d 359 - Lisboa v. Karner

167 Ohio App. 3d 359 - Lisboa v. Karner’s Empirical Analysis

2006

Citation profile

19
cited by 19 later decisions
1
states following
December 2024
most recently cited

19 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently December 2024

19 state decisions

120200620102020decided

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 State ex rel. Largent v. Fisher · State ex rel. Rootstown Local School District Board of Education v. Portage County Court of Common Pleas · 138 Ohio St. 417 - State Ex Rel. Ellis v. McCabe · State ex rel. Tilford v. Crush · State ex rel. Gilligan v. Hoddinott

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

  1. “in an action for divorce, the common pleas court, or its domestic relations division, is limited in its jurisdiction to the determination of domestic relations matters and any collateral claims *Page 9 must be brought in a separate action in the appropriate court or division thereof, where the claim involves determination of the rights of a third-party.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “The court of common pleas, including divisions of courts of domestic relations, has full equitable powers and jurisdiction appropriate to the determination of all domestic relations matters. This section is not a determination by the general assembly that such equitable powers and jurisdiction do not exist with respect to any such matter.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “R.C. 3105.011 * * * has been consistently interpreted as excluding collateral claims and non-domestic relations matters from the domestic relations court.”
    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.