Jones v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

14 state decisions

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

1. “Upon consideration of the objections to the magistrate’s decision as filed by the Defendant the Court finds, pursuant to Rule 53(D) of the Ohio Rules of Civil Procedure as follows: The Court, in reviewing the party’s motions, finds that the Magistrate’s findings are reasonable determinations and are not an abuse of discretion. :|: * * As such, the Court finds that the Magistrate’s recommendation as to spousal support is not an abuse of discretion. * * * In his fifth objection, Defendant contends that the Magistrate erred in findings that Defendant’s income was sixty thousand dollars ($60,000) prior to his work-related injury. However, in reviewing the transcript, the Court has found testimony from both Plaintiff * * * and Defendant * * * purporting that, prior to the injury, Defendant’s income was at least sixty thousand dollars ($60,000) per year. As such, the Court finds that the Magistrate’s determination was not an abuse of discretion. Defendant’s fifth objection is found not well taken and accordingly overruled. In his sixth objection, Defendant contends that Magistrate’s finding regarding Defendant’s available medical insurance benefits was in error. The Magistrate found that Defendant had “insurance benefits available and there was no evidence of current expense.” * * * Having reviewed the transcript, the Court finds that Defendant testified on direct examination that he had started receiving some type of assistance in paying medical bills. Furthermore, the Court found”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Barrientos v. Barrientos

2. “' "The 'abuse of discretion' standard that the trial court applied to review the decision of its magistrate is an appellate standard of review. It is applicable to the review performed by a superior court of the judgments and orders of inferior courts. Inherent in the abuse of discretion standard are presumptions of validity and correctness, which acknowledge the independence of the inferior courts by deferring to the particular discretion they exercise in rendering their decisions.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. In re J.P.

3. “[i]n ruling on objections, the court shall undertake an independent review as to the objected matters to ascertain that the magistrate has properly determined the factual issues and appropriately applied the law.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. In re J.P.