Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 82 Ohio App. 3d 792 - Whitt v. Bennett

82 Ohio App. 3d 792 - Whitt v. Bennett’s Empirical Analysis

1992

Citation profile

57
cited by 57 later decisions
1
states following
October 2025
most recently cited

57 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 57 later decisions — most recently October 2025 · most notably 124 Ohio App. 3d 525 - Vanest v. Pillsbury Co. (1997), 104 Ohio App. 3d 482 - Cerney v. Norfolk & Western Railway Co. (1995)

57 state decisions

2701992200020102020decided

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 Link v. Wabash Railroad · GTE Automatic Electric, Inc. v. ARC Industries, Inc. · 39 Ohio App. 2d 97 - Adomeit v. Baltimore · Caruso-Ciresi, Inc. v. Lohman · Argo Plastic Products Co. v. City of Cleveland

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

  1. “better position to weigh all the facts and circumstances, including the knowledge and opportunities available to [Appellee]”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
    e.g. Gursky v. Gursky, Unpublished Decision (10-24-2003) · Dunn v. Marthers, Unpublished Decision (9-25-2006)
  2. “However, fault should not automatically be imputed when an attorney has grossly neglected a diligent client's case and misleads the client to believe that his interests are being properly handled”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
    e.g. Connors v. Cook, Unpublished Decision (2-10-2004) · Maynard v. Miller
  3. “[Lorraine's] motion was filed within a reasonable time. In its judgment entry the trial court stated "* * * the motion was filed within a reasonable time of wife's discovery [husband] no longer had any intention to reconcile with her.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
    e.g. Cefaratti v. Cefaratti, Unpublished Decision (12-23-2005)

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.