89 Ohio App. 3d 814 - In Re Buffington’s Empirical Analysis
1993
Citation profile
10 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently September 2022
10 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 Strattman v. Studt · Heidelberg College v. Depew
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“`[Although trial courts have the authority to enforce their orders through contempt proceedings, R.C. 2705.02 , an order to pay court costs is essentially a judgment on a contractual debt where the court is the creditor and the party ordered to pay court costs is the debtor. As such, the creditor, i.e., the court, can collect only the *Page 7 money it is due by the methods provided for the collection of civil judgments. A contempt proceeding is not a proper method by which to collect a civil judgment. In re Buffington (1993), 89 Ohio App.3d 814 , 816 , 627 N.E.2d 1013 , citing Heidelberg College v. Depew (1988), 44 Ohio Misc.2d 20 , 541 N.E.2d 637 .'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.