Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 25 Ohio App. 2d 50 - State v. Ducey

25 Ohio App. 2d 50 - State v. Ducey’s Empirical Analysis

1970

Citation profile

19
cited by 19 later decisions
2
states following
June 2018
most recently cited

14 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently June 2018

14 state decisions

15019701980199020002010decided

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 49 Ohio App. 100 - Slawski v. Slawski · 24 Ohio App. 461 - Runnebaum v. State · 120 Ohio App. 270 - State v. Priest

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. ““A decree in a divorce action, ordering the payment of money for the support of a minor child, is not a judgment for the payment of money nor is it a debt within the constitutional inhibition against imprisonment for debt, but is in the nature of an order for the payment of alimony, and contempt will lie for wilful failure to comply with its terms.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““It is reasonable and proper for members of the public at large to assume that if another member of society desires to increase the population by the addition of his progeny, he full well intends to assume the burdens attendant therewith. “It is also reasonable for the state to provide for certain measures which exact penalties and sanctions for those who do not see fit to meet the attendant responsibilities of [their] progeny.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. ““Imprisonment imposed for a violation of R.C. 2151.42, making it an offense for a person charged with the care, support, maintenance, or education of a child to fail to do so, is not imprisonment for debt and, therefore, R.C. 2151.42 and R.C. 2151.99 are not in violation of Section 15, Article I, * * *.” Id., paragraph one of the syllabus.”
    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.