2 Ohio App. 3d 300 - Bilikam v. Bilikam’s Empirical Analysis
1982
Citation profile
47 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 47 later decisions — most recently July 2019 · most notably 28 Ohio St. 3d 190 - State v. Gilmore (1986), 44 Ohio App. 3d 161 - Testa v. Roberts (1988)
47 state decisions
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 Hanna v. Plumer · Dorrian v. Scioto Conservancy District · State Auto Mutual Ins. v. Chrysler Corp. · Kennedy v. Chalfin · 64 Ohio Misc. 45 - Walton v. Elftman
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 47 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““* * * In lieu of any order or in addition thereto, the court shall require the party failing to act or the attorney advising him or both to pay the reasonable expenses, including attorney’s fees, caused by the failure, unless the court expressly finds that the failure was substantially justified or that other circumstances make an award of expenses unjust.” (Emphasis added.)”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage““The statement was made by a decedent, or a deaf-mute who is now unable to testify, or a mentally incompetent person, where (a) the estate or personal representative of the decedent’s estate, or the guardian or trustee of the deaf-mute or incompetent person is a party, and (b) the statement was made before the death or the development of the deaf-mute condition or the incompetency, and (c) the statement is offered to rebut testimony by an adverse party on a matter which was within the knowledge of the decedent, deaf-mute, or incompetent person.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage““The second part of Civ. R. 37(D) is mandatory. If the trial court does not issue an order as a sanction, it is required to assess costs against the offending party and/or his attorney. The Supreme Court has held that ‘may’ is permissive and ‘shall’ is mandatory unless there is a clear legislative intent that these words should have another construction. Dorrian v. Scioto Conserv. Dist. (1971), 27 Ohio St. 2d 102 [ 56 O.O.2d 58 ] (first paragraph of syllabus). “The rule requires the awarding of reasonable expenses and attorney’s fees where a party fails to appear for depositions. Such a sanction is necessary to protect deposing parties from undue expense caused by an unresponsive oppo nent. Furthermore, when the court deems it proper in the interests of justice, it may excuse the offending party from such expenses by making an express finding that the failure was ‘substantially justified’ or that an award of expenses would otherwise be unjust. Such an order has not been entered in this case. Civ. R. 37(D) thus presumes a mandatory award of reasonable expenses, including attorney’s fees.””
2 later decisions 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.