Gilbraith v. Hixson’s Empirical Analysis
1987
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 2 district · 92 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 113 later decisions — most recently October 2025 · most notably Ohio Pyro, Inc. v. Ohio Department of Commerce (2007), 73 Ohio App. 3d 479 - Nelson v. Pleasant (1991)
1 federal appellate · 2 district · 92 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 Federated Department Stores, Inc. v. Moitie · Baldwin v. Ionwa State Traveling Men's Ass'n · Hart Steel Company v. Railroad Supply Company · Goodson v. McDonough Power Equipment, Inc. · Whitehead v. General Telephone 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 113 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Our starting point here is the recognition that the doctrine itself has deep roots in the policy considerations that have shaped the operation of this country’s legal system. As the United States Supreme Court has said, ‘ * * * “[the] doctrine of res judicata is not a mere matter of practice or procedure inherited from a more technical time than ours. It is a rule of fundamental and substantial justice, ‘of public policy and of private peace,’ which should be cordially regarded and enforced by the courts * * *.’” * * * “Simply put, the doctrine serves vital public interests by assuring that all litigation has a reasonable ending point and by preventing a party from having to contest the same issue or cause more than once. * * * ‘ “[P]ublic policy dictates that there be an end of litigation; that those who have contested an issue shall be bound by the results of the contest, and that matters once tried shall be considered forever settled as between the parties.” ’ * * * In achieving precisely these ends, the doctrine effectively promotes stability, certainty, respect, consistency and finality, both in individual judicial determinations and in the legal system as a whole. “In our estimation, the same considerations underpinning res judicata as a doctrine of general significance apply with equal force in parentage actions, and there is, accordingly, no sound policy reason for denying effect to the doctrine in such cases. The establishment and maintenance of the various aspects ”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage“It is well-settled in Ohio, under the doctrine of res judicata, that a final judgment or decree rendered upon the merits, without fraud or collusion, by a court of competent jurisdiction is conclusive of rights, questions and facts in issue as to the parties and their privies, and is a complete bar to any subsequent action on the same claim or cause of action between the parties or those in privity with them.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“a judgment entered by consent, although predicated upon an agreement between the parties, is an adjudication as effective as if the merits had been litigated and remains, -5- Warren CA2012-06-056 CA2012-06-057 therefore, just as enforceable as any other validly entered judgment.”
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.