Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 52 OHIOST3D 228 - King v. Housel

King v. Housel’s Empirical Analysis

1990

Citation profile

16
cited by 16 later decisions
1
states following
April 2008
most recently cited

4 district · 6 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Temple v. Wean United, Inc. · Van Fossen v. Babcock & Wilcox Co. · Jeffers v. Olexo · 143 Ohio St. 362 - Gugle v. Loeser · Spayd v. Turner

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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “{¶ 33} “An attorney who employs another attorney to assist him in the representation of a client has a duty to fully disclose to his client the fee agreement with the employed attorney. DR 2-107(A)(l). The duty of full disclosure requires that the amount to be paid and manner of payment, as well as other relevant fee agreements, be disclosed to the client by his attorney.” Id., paragraph one of the syllabus.”
    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.