4 Ohio App. 3d 263 - Hines v. Amole’s Empirical Analysis
1982
Citation profile
21 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 24 later decisions — most recently May 2016
21 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 56 Ohio App. 2d 144 - Eisenberg v. Peyton · Gary v. May · 142 Ohio St. 261 - Elser v. Parke · 90 Ohio App. 506 - Leyman Corp. v. Piggly-Wiggly Corp. · L.T.M. Builders Co. v. Village of Jefferson
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.
“[i]n order that a third person may enforce a promise made for his benefit, it must appear that the contract was made and entered into directly or primarily for the benefit of such third person.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“the third person is in the contemplation of the parties.”
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.