31 Ohio App. 3d 201 - In Re Barnes’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

24 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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““Whenever a party requests a hearing in accordance with this section and section 119.06 of the Revised Code, the agency shall immediately set the date, time, and place for such hearing and forthwith notify the party thereof. The date set for such hearing shall be within fifteen days, but not earlier than seven days, after the party has requested a hearing, unless otherwise agreed to by both the agency and the party.””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Immke Circle Leasing v. Bur. of Motor Veh., Unpublished Decision (8-15-2006) · 61 Ohio App. 3d 256 - Ohio State Racing Commission v. Kash

2. ““This authority to continue a hearing on the board’s own motion must be read in pari materia with the fifteen-day deadline in R.C. 119.07, because R.C. 119.06 through 119.10 combine to set forth in detail the administrative procedures for the suspension or revocation of state licenses. State, ex rel. Kendrick, v. Masheter (1964), 176 Ohio St. 232 , 235, 27 O.O.2d 128 , 129-130, 199 N.E.2d 13 , 15. In our judgment, R.C. 119.09 gives the fifteen-day provision of R.C. 119.07 the character of being directory, not mandatory. We hold that the continuance of the instant hearing to June 15, 1984, albeit perfunctory, was within the authority and discretion of the board, State, ex rel. Columbus Gas & Fuel Co., v. Pub. Util. Comm. (1930), 122 Ohio St. 473 , 172 N.E. 284 , and that the board’s jurisdiction over the charges against Dr. Barnes was not terminated by failure to hold the hearing within the fifteen-day period referred to in R.C. 119.07.” In re Barnes, supra, 31 Ohio App.3d at 207-208 , 31 OBR at 477, 510 N.E.2d at 399 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 61 Ohio App. 3d 256 - Ohio State Racing Commission v. Kash

3. ““ T: of, relating to, or conducted in or as if in a clinic (as a medical clinic): as a: involving or depending on direct observation of the living patient ( — diagnosis) ( — examination) b: observable by clinical inspection ( — tuberculosis) c: based on clinical observation ( — picture) ( — treatment) d: applying objective or standardized methods (as interviews and personality or intelligence tests) to the description, evaluation, and modification of human behavior ( — psychology)000.’” 31 Ohio App. 3d at 205 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 26 Kan. App. 2d 855 - Endorf v. Bohlender