Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 29 Ohio App. 2d 69 - Hogan v. Hogan

29 Ohio App. 2d 69 - Hogan v. Hogan’s Empirical Analysis

1972

Citation profile

12
cited by 12 later decisions
2
states following
June 2025
most recently cited

12 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently June 2025

12 state decisions

40197219801990200020102020decided

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 Miller v. Superior Court · 165 Ohio St. 456 - Lower v. Ehrhart · Lazar v. Superior Court · Plummer v. Superior Court · 130 Ohio St. 214 - Holloway v. Holloway

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

  1. ““The eontemnor is punished for his -willful failure to comply with a valid judicial order. In such a case power of contempt is not dependent upon the presence or absence of continuing jurisdiction over the subject matter and parties to the original divorce action. It springs separately, from the act or omission in defiance of the. court and from the actual arrest, if no more, of the eontemnor. The presence or absence of jurisdiction is not a basis, therefore, for an abstract distinction between punishment for refusal to make payments for maintenance and support and punishment for refusal to make payments to effect a property settlement, in each case an order by the court. In either event, defiance of a valid judicial order should be equally enforceable by proceedings to punish as for a contempt, subject in each case to the same defenses.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “: “*:* * To require a trial court to distinguish between those terms which may be in the naturé of a property settlement and terms which relate to maintenance and' support of the spouse or children enforcing only the latter, would be arbitrary and' artificial and would run counter to the settled law of this state.””
    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.