86 Ohio App. 3d 574 - Lape v. Rose’s Empirical Analysis
1993
Citation profile
2 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Harless v. Willis Day Warehousing Co. · Mitseff v. Wheeler · Gressman v. McClain · 49 Ohio St. 3d 289 - Smith v. 10th Inning, Inc. · 61 Ohio App. 3d 113 - Holley v. Beverage King Co., Inc.
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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“" * * * A person has a cause of action against a permit holder or his employee for personal injury, death or property damage caused by the negligent actions of an intoxicated person occurring off the premises or away from a parking lot under the permit holder’s control only when both of the following can be shown by a preponderance of the evidence: "(A) The permit holder or his employee knowingly sold an intoxicating beverage to at least one of the following: "(1) A noticeably intoxicated person in violation of division (B) of section 4301.22 of the Revised Code; "(B) The person's intoxication proximately caused the personal injury, death or property damage.””
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.