Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 76 Ohio App. 3d 276 - Weishaar v. Strimbu

76 Ohio App. 3d 276 - Weishaar v. Strimbu’s Empirical Analysis

1991

Citation profile

32
cited by 32 later decisions
1
states following
July 2024
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 27 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 32 later decisions — most recently July 2024 · most notably Radvansky v. City of Olmsted Falls (2005), 100 Ohio App. 3d 111 - Saydell v. Geppetto's Pizza & Ribs Franchise Systems, Inc. (1994)

3 federal appellate · 27 state decisions

1301991200020102020decided

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 C. E. Morris Co. v. Foley Construction Co. · State v. Stumpf · Delfino v. Paul Davies Chevrolet, Inc. · 40 Ohio App. 2d 179 - Slife v. Kundtz Properties, Inc. · 34 Ohio App. 3d 42 - Zuber v. Department of Insurance of Ohio

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

  1. “An agreement is only removed from operation of the statute [of frauds by virtue of partial performance] where the party relying on the agreement changes his position to his detriment and makes it impractical or impossible to return the parties to their original status.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““In order for a court to dismiss a complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted (Civ.R. 12(B)(6)), it must appear beyond doubt from the complaint that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts entitling him to recovery. * * * ” (Citation omitted.)”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “The most acceptable meaning to be given to the expression, proof by a preponderance, seems to be proof which leads the [trier of fact] to find the existence of the contested fact is more probable than its nonexistence.”
    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.