Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 81 OHIOST3D 524 - State v. Patterson

State v. Patterson’s Empirical Analysis

1998

Citation profile

9
cited by 9 later decisions
1
states following
January 2019
most recently cited

9 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently January 2019

9 state decisions

50199820002010decided

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 Johnson's Markets, Inc. v. New Carlisle Department of Health · United Telephone Co. v. Limbach · 152 Ohio St. 458 - Couts v. Rose · State v. Arnold · Maxfield v. Brooks

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

  1. “This court in the interpretation of related and co-existing statutes must harmonize and give full application to all such statutes unless they are irreconcilable and in hopeless conflict.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “a reasonable construction as to give the proper force and effect to each and all such statutes.”
    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.