42 Ohio App. 3d 151 - Marion v. Baker’s Empirical Analysis
1987
Citation profile
13
cited by 13 later decisions
2
states following
December 2007
most recently cited
13 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Ohio Valley Radiology Associates, Inc. v. Ohio Valley Hospital Ass'n · Collins v. Myers · 142 Ohio St. 132 - National Retailers Mutual Ins. v. Gross
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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“`It is seen that, upon the timely commencing of an action by an injured insured against the tort-feasor, the tort-feasor is put on notice that he must defend the action and, pursuant to that end, must search out the evidence needed for such defense. That evidence, if existent, is identical with that which such tort-feasor must search out in order to defeat an action by the insured's subrogee, and to find that under such circumstances the subrogee is foreclosed from asserting his rights in "the subject of a single cause of action”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“(as described in * * *[ Lake Erie Western Rd. Co. v. Falk (1900), 62 Ohio St. 297 , 56 N.E. 1020 ] * * *) merely because he is not made a party prior to the running of a statute of limitations, the period of which (if we are to follow the rationale of * * * [ Neilson v. Fry (1866), 16 Ohio St. 552 ] * * *) is primarily directed to the transitory nature of evidence concerning negligence, is to attribute to such statute a much narrower meaning than it was meant to have and to give a tort-feasor an advantage not intended thereby.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage““Intervention of Right. Upon timely application anyone shall be permitted to intervene in an action: (1) when a statute of this state confers an unconditional right to intervene; or (2) when the claimant claims an interest related to the property or transaction which is the subject of the action and he is so situated that the disposition of the action may as a practical matter impair or impede his ability to protect that interest, unless the applicant’s interest is adequately represented by existing 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.