49 Ohio App. 3d 139 - Pyle v. Ledex, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
1988
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 27 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 38 later decisions — most recently March 2024 · most notably 78 Ohio App. 3d 73 - Hanly v. Riverside Methodist Hospitals (1991), Humphreys v. Bellaire Corp. (1992)
3 federal appellate · 27 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 19 Ohio St. 3d 100 - Mers v. Dispatch Printing Co. · Henkel v. Educational Research Council of America · Phung v. Waste Management, Inc. · 33 Ohio App. 3d 220 - Biskupich v. Westbay Manor Nursing Home · Fawcett v. G. C. Murphy & 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 38 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Generally, where the employee furnishes no consideration other than his or her services incident to the employment, the relationship amounts to an indefinite general hiring terminable at the will of either party unless the terms of the contract or other circumstances clearly manifest the parties' intent to bind each other.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“A [successful] Civ. R. 12(B)(6) motion only determines whether the pleader's allegations set forth an actionable claim.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“*** [TJhe Ohio Supreme Court has refused to recognize a cause of action based upon a covenant of good faith and far dealing, but has instead held that at-will employment relationships may be terminated for any cause and at any tame 'even if done in gross or reckless disregard of an employee's rights.' Phung v. Waste Management, Inc. (1986), 23 Ohio St d 100, 102 ***.”
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.