Oberlin v. Friedman’s Empirical Analysis
1965
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 35 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 40 later decisions — most recently September 2019 · most notably Jennings Buick, Inc. v. City of Cincinnati (1980), Howard v. Rogers (1969)
2 federal appellate · 35 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 Siverson v. Weber · 119 Ohio St. 422 - Ault v. Hall · 144 Ohio St. 1 - Fink v. New York Central Rd. · 151 Ohio St. 503 - Soltz v. Colony Recreation Center · 148 Ohio St. 101 - Winslow v. Ohio Bus Line 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 40 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Q At the time you began to live with Mrs. Domany in February, 1952 were you then divorced from your wife in Europe? "A I was divorced because my wife — my ex-wife, she in Czechoslovakia — give to the court — "Q Did you believe you were then divorced? "A Yeah. "Q I see. Then is it the fact, Mr. Domany, that you filed for divorce here in Cleveland in 1953, a year after? "A Yes. "Q Yes, and is it the fact that your wife in Europe filed an answer and contested the divorce? "A (No response). "Q May I just have an answer to it? Did she file an answer to that petition for a divorce contesting it, sir? "THE COURT: Do you understand what he means? "THE WITNESS: No, I don't understand. "Q I see. Did you get a divorce from her in 1953, at that time, from your wife in Europe? "A No. "Q You did not. All right. Now, did you have three children living in Europe from your first marriage? "A Yes. 3 "The doctrine of res ipsa loquitur is not applicable in a case where the petition and proof disclose that plaintiff had knowledge of the facts and circumstances showing the claimed negligence of defendant.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“In our opinion, if the allegations of the petition and the proof in support thereof call for its application, the doctrine of res ipsa loqitur should be applied even though the petition alleges also and evidence is offered to prove specific acts of negligence.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage““Thus, in the instant ease, the question immediately arises'as to what ‘instrumentality’ caused plaintiff’s injuries. It may have been either (1) what defendant injected into plaintiff, (2) something else which defendant or the nurse under his control did or failed to do, (3) something which the surgeon did or failed to do in performing the operation, or (4) physical frailties or natural reactions of plaintiff not induced by, nor undiscovered because of, any negligence of anyone.””
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.