8 Ohio App. 3d 448 - Kelm v. Hess’s Empirical Analysis
1983
Citation profile
21 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently May 2019
21 state decisions
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 116 Ohio St. 361 - Lynch v. Board of Education · 54 Ohio St. 2d 488 - State ex rel. Ocasek v. Riley · 21 Ohio App. 2d 38 - Favret Co. v. West
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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Where a final judgment orders the payment of money, and the order is not stayed but instead complied with by voluntary payment of the amount ordered, an appeal from the order will be dismissed as moot since reversal of the order would be ineffectual in affording any relief to the appellant.” Kelrn v. Hess (1983), 8 Ohio App.3d 448 , 8 OBR 572, 457 N.E.2d 911 .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““ ‘Although appellant apparently paid the judgment under threat of garnishment, a pending garnishment would not render payment involuntary, in view of appellant’s entitlement to a stay of the trial court’s judgment as a matter of law, upon giving adequate bond. State, ex rel. Ocasek v. Riley (1978), 54 Ohio St.2d 488, 490 [ 8 O.O.3d 466, 467 , 377 N.E.2d 792, 793 ]. Since appellant was in a financial position to pay the judgment, she undoubtedly would been able to give an adequate appeal bond.’ ” Fifth Third Bank, at 4, quoting Kelm v. Hess (1983), 8 Ohio App.3d 448 , 8 OBR 572, 457 N.E.2d 911 .”
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.