Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 60 Ohio App. 2d 304 - Culberson v. Culberson

60 Ohio App. 2d 304 - Culberson v. Culberson’s Empirical Analysis

1978

Citation profile

28
cited by 28 later decisions
1
states following
November 2014
most recently cited

28 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently November 2014 · most notably 16 Ohio App. 3d 329 - Courtney v. Courtney (1984), 2 Ohio App. 3d 307 - Vincenzo v. Vincenzo (1982)

28 state decisions

10019781980199020002010decided

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 Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus for Merritt W Green II · 79 Ohio App. 397 - Beach, Jr. v. Beach · 115 Ohio App. 442 - Lenzer v. Lenzer · 1 Ohio App. 2d 451 - Schwartz v. Schwartz · 19 Ohio App. 2d 167 - Simpson v. Simpson

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

  1. “adequate notice, time to prepare any defense and an opportunity to be heard.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “A court may hold a party in contempt who fails or refuses to comply with its orders and may impose such penalties as are reasonable and just. (Internal citation omitted). A violation of visitation orders is punishable by contempt.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “. . . [T]he children of a dissolved marriage are not pawns whose custody may be used for the punishment of a wrongdoer.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.