Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 75 Ohio App. 3d 846 - Easterling v. Am. Olean Tile Co., Inc.

75 Ohio App. 3d 846 - Easterling v. Am. Olean Tile Co., Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

1991

Citation profile

27
cited by 27 later decisions
2
states following
December 2023
most recently cited

27 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently December 2023 · most notably 719 So. 2d 757 - LITTLE BY LITTLE v. Bell (1998), 133 Ohio App. 3d 651 - Aristocrat Lakewood Nursing Home v. Mayne (1999)

27 state decisions

1001991200020102020decided

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 Harless v. Willis Day Warehousing Co. · Bostic v. Connor · Peterson v. Teodosio · Wilmington Steel Products, Inc. v. Cleveland Electric Illuminating Co. · Hawkins v. Ivy

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

  1. “"While there does not appear to be any set time limit beyond which a motion to amend would be deemed untimely, the Supreme Court has held that such motions filed eleven and seven days before trial are 'patently' untimely. Wilmington Steel Products, Inc. v. Cleveland Elec. Illuminating Co. , [ 60 Ohio St.3d 120 , 123, 573 N.E.2d 622 (1991) ]. Furthermore, decisions by the appellate courts of this state tend to indicate that there is a certain stage in litigation beyond which it becomes increasingly difficult to find an abuse of discretion in the denial of a motion to amend. See, e.g., DiPaolo v. DeVictor , 51 Ohio App.3d 161 , 170, 555 N.E.2d 969 , 973 [ (1988) ] (no abuse of discretion when the proposed amendment is sought after trial has been set and nine months after the complaint was originally filed)[.]"”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Implied consent may be interpreted from acquiescence to continued use of the property by the public.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “the only duty owed to a trespasser is to refrain from willful or wanton misconduct.”
    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.