Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 68 OHIOST3D 521 - Broz v. Winland

Broz v. Winland’s Empirical Analysis

1994

Citation profile

73
cited by 73 later decisions
2
states following
May 2022
most recently cited

64 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 73 later decisions — most recently May 2022 · most notably Sanderson v. Ohio Edison Co. (1994), 113 Ohio App. 3d 374 - Phillips v. Rayburn (1996)

64 state decisions

3201994200020102020decided

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 Goodson v. McDonough Power Equipment, Inc. · Whitehead v. General Telephone Co. · Preferred Risk Insurance v. Gill · 135 Ohio St. 225 - Luntz v. Stern · 52 Cal. 2d 437 - Shapiro v. Republic Indemnity Co. of America

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

  1. ““(4) * * * When a motion for a directed verdict has been properly made, and the trial court, after construing the evidence most strongly in favor of the party against whom the motion is directed, finds that upon any determinative issue reasonable minds could come to but one conclusion upon the evidence submitted and that conclusion is adverse to such party, the court shall sustain the motion and direct a verdict for the moving party as to that issue.””
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Civ.R.50(A) * * * requires the trial court to give the nonmoving party the benefit of all reasonable inferences that may be drawn from the evidence.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “'The main legal thread which runs throughout the determination of the applicability of res judicata, inclusive of the adjunct principle of collateral estoppel, is the necessity of a fair opportunity to fully litigate and to be heard in the due process sense.'”
    2 later decisions 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.