48 Ohio App. 3d 181 - Schrader v. Gillette’s Empirical Analysis
1988
Citation profile
16 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 22 later decisions — most recently December 2019
16 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 Harless v. Willis Day Warehousing Co. · Hoffman v. Davidson · 11 Ohio App. 2d 160 - Markese v. Ellis · 68 Ohio App. 2d 247 - Rowe v. Bliss · 70 Ohio App. 337 - Wright v. City of Lorain
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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The basis for this principle is that `one cannot justly or equitably lull his adversary into a false sense of security, and thereby cause the adversary to subject a claim to the bar of the statute of limitations.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Under Ohio law, the estoppel doctrine can be employed to prohibit inequitable use of the statute of limitations.”
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.