Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 32 OHIOST2D 48 - Gregory v. Flowers

Gregory v. Flowers’s Empirical Analysis

1972

Citation profile

134
cited by 134 later decisions
1
states following
January 2026
most recently cited

14 federal appellate · 101 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 134 later decisions — most recently January 2026 · most notably Van Fossen v. Babcock & Wilcox Co. (1988), 87 Ohio St. 3d 350 - Bielat v. Bielat (2000)

14 federal appellate · 101 state decisions

480197219801990200020102020decided

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 Guaranty Trust Co. v. York · Sibbach v. Wilson & Co. · Garrett v. Co · Home Ins Co v. Dick · Wells v. Simonds Abrasive Co.

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

  1. “... under Ohio law, the statutory right of an employee to file an application for modification of an award is a substantive right which accrues at the time of the claimant’s injury. As such, worker’s compensation claims are unliquidated, noncontingent claims until such time as the claimant’s right to seek additional compensation lapses, and such claims may be estimated by the bankruptcy court under 11 U.S.C. § 502 (e)(1) for purposes of allowance.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[t]he General Assembly shall have no power to pass retroactive laws....”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “"(A) The reenactment, amendment, or repeal of a statute does not, except as provided in division (B) of this section: "(1) Affect the prior operation of the statute or any prior action taken thereunder; "(2) Affect any validation, cure, right, privilege, obligation, or liability previously acquired, accrued, accorded, in incurred thereunder; "(3) Affect any violation thereof or penalty forfeiture, or punishment incurred in respect thereto, prior to the amendment or repeal; "(4) Affect any investigation, proceeding, or remedy in respect of any such privilege, obligation, liability, penalty, forfeiture, or punishment; and the investigation, proceeding, or remedy may be instituted, continued, or enforced, and the penalty, forfeiture, or punishment imposed, as if the statute had not been repealed or amended. "(B) If the penalty, forfeiture, or punishment for any offense is reduced by a reenactment or amendment of a statute; the penalty, forfeiture, or punishment, if not already imposed, shall be imposed according to the statute as amended."”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.